(BrrteiaMiral tarn anh Discipline. 



A CHARGE TO THE CLERGY 



OF THE 



PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH 



OF VIRGINIA. 



3? 



BY THE 



RIGHT REV. WILLIAM MEADE, D. D. 



"Of Law, there can be no less acknowledged, than that her seat is the bosom of God, 
her voice the harmony of the world. All things in heaven and earth do her homage, the 
very least as feeling her care, and the greatest as not exempt from her power. Both 
angels, and men, and creatures of what condition soever, tho. each in different sort and 
manner, yet with uniform consent, admiring her as the mother of their peace and joy." 

Hooker. 



RICHMOND; 

H. K. ELLYSON, PRINTER, MAIN STREET. 

1850. 



/ 



*7 



CONTENTS. 



SECTION I.— INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 
SECTION II. — SPECIAL USE OE DISCIPLINE. 
SECTION LTL— DIEPICULTY OP IT. 

SECTION TV.— DISCIPLINE UNDER THE OLD DISPENSATION. 
SECTION V.— UNDER THE NEW. 

SECTION VI.— DISCIPLINE OE THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 
SECTION VTI. — OE THE ENGLISH. 

SECTION VTLT. — OE THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF AMERICA. 
SECTION IX.— CONCLUDING REMARKS. 



APPENDIX ON THEATRICAL AND OTHER AMUSEMENTS, BY BISHOP COLLIER 
AND OTHERS, 



CHARGE TO THE CLERGY 



OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF VIRGINIA, ON 
THE SUBJECT OF DISCIPLINE. 



Dear Brethren:— 

By the 27th Canon of our General Convention it is 
declared to be proper ; that every Bishop shall, at least once 
in three years, deliver a charge to the clergy of his Diocese, 
besides pastoral letters to the people of the same. Although 
but two years have elapsed since 1 endeavored to perform 
this duty, I yet deem it expedient to address you at this 
time; and if an excuse were needed for seeming to do a 
work of supererogation, it might be found in this, among 
other facts, that an interval of five years was permitted to 
intervene between the two last charges. 

SECTION I. — INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 

The subject to which I invite your attention at this time, is 
the exercise of discipline, according to the rubrics and canons 
of the Church, in the congregations committed to your care. 
Whatever assistance you ma3 r have from those who are over 
you in the Lord, or from some of those over whom you are 
in the Lord, nevertheless on you, according to God's word, 
the practice of the Church in all ages, and from the nature of 
your office, this duty and responsibility mainly, na3^, almost 
entirely rests. Wherefore, at the time of your elevation to 
the second grade of the ministry, when you are permitted to 
take full charge of a congregation, having purchased to 
yourselves a good degree, by performing the office of a deacon 
well, you are publicly, and in the most solemn manner, 
required by the Bishop, in the prescribed service, to promise 
that you u will give your faithful diligence, always so to 



6 



minister the doctrine, sacraments and discipline of the 
Church, as the Lord hath commanded, and this Church 
hath received the same, according to the commandments of 
God." On this promise, yon are ordained to be "faithful 
dispensers of the word of God and his holy sacraments." 
Then it is that the keys of Christ's kingdom are put into 
your hands, to open or to shut the same. Then is power 
given you in his Church below, to remit or retain sins — not 
in the way claimed by the Church of Rome — but in that 
scriptural way set forth in all the offices and confessions of 
Protestant Christendom — that is, by the faithful preaching 
of God's word, the due administration of the sacraments 
and the right exercise of godly discipline. You are also in 
the same service, and at the same time most solemnly 
warned of the "greatness of your fault, and the horrible 
punishment that will ensue," if through your negligence 
the Church, or any member thereof, do take any hurt or 
hindrance." 

The exercise of godly discipline, both as to the clergy 
and laity, has ever been regarded by all the Reformed 
Churches as one of the notes or marks of a true Church of 
Christ. The want of it, or the substitute for it, of a most 
corrupt and pernicious system in the Romish communion, is 
one of those defects which have made many deny her a 
place among the Churches of Christ, and others assign her 
the very least and lowest which can entitle to the name of a 
Church. Our homily for Whitsunday says of the "True 
Church," that is, the Church in her integrity, that it "hath 
always three notes or marks, whereby it is known, viz: 
pure and sound doctrine; the sacraments duly administered 
according to Christ's institution; and the right use of eccle- 
siastical discipline. This description of the Church is 
agreeable both to the scriptures of God and also to the 
doctrine of the ancient fathers, so that none may justly find 
fault therewith." All these notes or marks, the homily 



7 



denies to the Church of Rome, as it then was, and had been 
for nine hundred years. The Church of Rome is, therefore, 
regarded as a most maimed and imperfect one, even by those 
who admit her to the rank of a Church of Christ. She 
herself does not deny the necessity of this note of the 
Church, and long before the Reformation confessed herself 
most defective therein, ever proposing amendment, but 
never accomplishing it. No branch of the Christian 
Church, no sect or schism, however heretical, but admitted 
that it was the ordinance of God, and made some preten- 
sions to it. Some separations have been made on this 
ground alone, that the body from which they separated, was 
too destitute of this important feature of a Church, though 
possessing all others. 

SECTION II. — THE SPECIAL USE OF DISCIPLINE. 

It being admitted by all that God hath appointed this as 
one of the instruments by which we are to make full trial 
of our ministry in edifying the body of Christ, that is, 
building up the faithful for heaven, we must, of course, 
acknowledge the duty of its use, nor can we expect the 
appropriate blessing without it. The same God who has 
enjoined and promised to bless the faithful preaching of the 
word, and holy administration of the sacraments, has 
appointed this to be used with them, and his word must not 
be broken, and thus all parts maimed and weakened in 
their operation. Some good may doubtless be done by the 
parts thus separated, especially if they be separated through 
no fault of our own, but of unavoidable necessity. Faith- 
ful preaching of itself may effect much. Fervent, effectual 
prayer may avail much. The reverent administration of 
ordinances may commend them to many, and be the means 
of grace. But the special effects of all these may be greatly 
hindered for want of this other instrument, while the partic- 
ular blessing assigned to this may be lost by its neglect. 



s 



Reproach may thus be cast upon the Church by treating 
the evil as the good. The evil communications of the 
unworthy may corrupt the good manners of the righteous. 
The very word, and sacraments, and worship, may come to 
be despised; and many will begin to ask, "Who will show 
us any good?" This principle is not confined to the 
Church of God. It is true of all communities, civil, social 
and religious. "We see the whole world and each part 
thereof," says Hooker, "so compacted, that so long as each 
thing perform eth that work which is natural to it, it thereby 
pressrveth both other things and itself also. Every thing 
is for some end, neither can anything be available to any 
end which is not proportionable thereto." "We may not 
in any one special kind admire her (divine wisdom), that 
we disgrace her in any other, but let all her ways be accord- 
ing to their place and degree adored." We see how this is 
exemplified in families, which are designed to be nurseries 
for the Church of God. Parents are invested with great 
authority over children, and directed by precept, example, 
and the exercise of wholesome discipline, to train them up 
for heaven. But how often is it attempted to effect this by 
the two former alone, the latter being dispensed with as too 
painful. Without doubt God does sometimes, for the child- 
ren's sake, make up the deficiency, and bless to them good 
example and pious instruction. But as a general rule, when 
authority is not exerted in the exercise of wholesome disci- 
pline, then are pious admonitions and holy examples entire- 
ly lost upon them, and even despised. Therefore it is, that 
parents are directed to bring up their children in the nurture^ 
that is discipline, as well as admonition of the Lord. 
Ministers especially are required to be examples in this 
respect, for they are not allowed to be ordained, without a 
public, solemn promise, to rule their households well; such 
as do not, being according to scripture declared to be unfit 
to rule the Church of God. How many weak parents, both 



9 



in and out of the ministry, have, by neglect of this, though 
perhaps making some trial of other means, utterly failed, 
and brought shame and sorrow on themselves, and disgrace 
on the Church of God. See this exemplified in some of 
the children of Eli and David, who, though in many 
respects men after God's own heart, yet failing here, brought 
sorrow on themselves, reproach on the Ghurch and ruin on 
their sons. It was not thus with old Abraham, of whom 
God said, u I know my servant Abraham that he will com- 
mand his children and his household after him. ' ' Such was 
not the counsel which God inspired the wisest of the sons of 
men to deliver on this subject. In many proverbs does he 
warn against the neglect of salutary discipline ; and in one 
especially declares that he who neglects it, u hates his 
child." Certain it is, that a parent's hatred is often less 
injurious to the child than his weak indulgence. It were 
easy to show, that it is thus in regard to all authority placed 
by God in the hands of man for the benefit of others. No 
such authority is ever relinquished, or neglected, without 
evil, sooner or later, to all concerned. Be it in the house- 
hold, be it in the State, the army, the navy or any society 
whatever, if the rulers thereof be not a terror to evil doers, 
by the rod of correction, as well as a praise to them that do 
well, by the commendation bestowed, and the rewards 
distributed, then confusion, discord, vice, and much unhap- 
piness must ensue. All experience, all history testifies to 
this. The worst days of Israel were, when every man did 
that " which was right in his own eyes." 

SECTION TIL— DIFFICULTY OF DISCIPLINE. 

As the administration of discipline is a most important 
part of the machinery of Christ's Church, not to be omitted 
without diminishing the effect, and disordering the working 
of all others, so it is to be confessed, that its right use is 
most difficult, requiring the full exercise not only of fidelity, 



10 



but of judgment, patience and kindness. It is doubtless on 
account of the difficulties, and painfullness of it, that some 
ministers shrink from its exercise, and leave it almost un- 
tried. Like all other things, however, which are potent for 
good if rightly used> it is also potent for ill, when abused. 
It has been, like all the appointments of God, perverted in 
the hands of man. In the evil days of the Chuich, civil 
and ecclesiastical power have been united in the same 
hands, and those, the hands of the clergy. Civil pains 
and penalties have been inflicted on the rebellious and her- 
etical, while money and penance have not only cancelled 
and atoned for sins that were past, but have purchased the 
privilege of sinning in time to come. Against all this the 
Reformers protested, and by their preaching, living and 
dying, purged the Church of such abominations. We are 
in no such danger now, though some might desire to restore 
them in part. Our danger lies in a different direction. As 
to our Mother Church, the supremacy of the State has ever 
held her in bondage. In our own country the entire separa- 
tion of Church and State, and the poverty and dependence 
of the clergy, forbid all fear of ecclesiastical tyranny. A 
time serving and cowardly fear of offending, is the snare 
now laid for God's ministers. Nevertheless, there may be 
cases of error, and even of oppression, at this day and in 
this land, and it is proper that the Church should be well 
guarded against them. This can be done, and has been 
done, by a legislation as special, and as full, as times and 
circumstances require, and not only by uniting a portion of 
the laity in making the laws, but occasionally, to a certain 
extent, in the execution of them. Besides this, so careful is 
the Church to have her discipline wisely administered, that 
she intrusts it not to Deacons, who are on probation, but 
only to those who have proved themselves worthy of such a 
trust, and of being admitted to a higher order. Nor does 
she wholly intrust it even to these, since they are required to 



11 



report their acts of discipline to the Bishop, who is usually 
one not only higher in office, but of more age and expe- 
rience. To him an appeal may be made by any who feels 
aggrieved. Yea more, the church does not even intrust this 
power to his hands, without reminding him at his conse- 
cration, that while diligently exercising discipline, by the 
authority of God and the order of the Church, he must 
mingle mercy with justice, saying, a Be so merciful, that 
thou be not too remiss; so minister discipline, that thou 
forget not mercy." Discipline should ever be exercised, as 
wise yet tender parents deal with those children whom they 
chasten in love, and for their good — not in selfish anger — 
provoking them to wrath; but to save them from ruin in 
both worlds. It should be done as skilful, conscientious 
physicians administer the sickening medicine, or use the 
amputating knife. They do it reluctantly and painfully. 
Fain would they forbear, but the patient might die, and his 
death be laid to their charge. It is thus our kind Heavenly 
Father and great Physician deals with us. He chastens us 
with the rod of love, proportioning his corrections to our 
faults and our need. He bears long with us, before the 
time comes when he must cut off. Nor does he cast us 
quite away even then, being ever ready to receive his re- 
turning prodigals. Thus dealt he with the Jews — the peo- 
ple whom he so loved. Long did he bear with them, seek- 
ing sometimes by his goodness, sometimes b}^ severity, to 
lead them to repentance, until at length he banished them 
for seventy years from their land and temple, and now for 
eighteen hundred years has scattered them over the earth; 
though he may yet, if they repent, restore them again. 
These tilings are intended as examples to God's ministers. 

SEC. IV.— DISCIPLINE UNDER THE OLD DISPENSATION. 

Having made these preliminary remarks, we enter on the 
more regular consideration of the subject before us. 



12 



1st. Let us seek for its origin and authority. 

Its institution is divine. God himself established and en- 
forced it in Paradise, where, though man was in a state of 
innocence, he was under probation, and liable to discipline. 
One act of self-denial was required even then. One pro- 
hibitory law issued from the throne of God, with a heavy 
penalty annexed to its violation. Death to body and soul 
was the threatened penalty. But our long-suffering God 
did not inflict it immediately. A part was suspended for a 
time, the remainder might be averted altogether by repent- 
ance and faith. Though anathema was inflicted, maran- 
atha, the everlasting curse, was withheld. They were cast 
out from the earthly Eden, but a hope was held out of 
restoration to a heavenly one. Some have thought that the 
punishment, as inflicted, was too great for the deed. They 
should remember that in the deed, was the sin of rebellion 
and disobedience towards God, and that he best knew how 
to deal with the offender, so as to punish the crime, correct 
the transgressor, and establish his authority in this and other 
worlds. For the purpose of carrying on his wholesome 
government, he has, in addition to all those fatherly chas- 
tisements, by which in his providence he chastens the erring 
children of men, appointed in his Church certain ministers 
of discipline. Of this the patriarchs were for a long time 
his chief agents. They were invested with absolute author- 
ity, being fathers, priests and princes in their families, com- 
manding their households after them, blessing or cursing, in 
the name of the Lord. In due time he thought proper to 
select one family, and multiply it into a great nation, making 
it a peculiar people, to shew forth his praises and to be a 
channel of blessings to the whole world. To that people 
he gave the great moral law, the sum and substance of all 
moral laws and precepts. He wrote it distinctly with his 
own hand on tables of stone. With more or less distinct- 
ness he writes it on the fleshly tables of the hearts of all 



13 



men. To this rule must all the principles and actions of 
men be brought, for by this law is the knowledge of sin, 
which is the transgression of it. All the rules, prohibitions 
and ordinances of the Jews were designed to enforce this 
law, and make it a school-master to bring us to Christ. 
Many things appointed and prohibited to the Jews, seem to 
us trivial, and unworthy of the greatness of God, especially 
when considered in connection with the penalties of disobe- 
dience. These penalties were fines, and offerings required 
for atonement ; sometimes 1 bodily pains. Sometimes the 
offenders were separated from God's people, and deprived of 
his ordinances. They were then said to be cut off, or sepa- 
rated. This was for a longer or shorter period, according to 
the offence. Sometimes they were simply said to be cut off, 
at others utterly cut off. Where the period of separation, 
and the privileges withdrawn were not precisely specified, 
the Jewish courts decided. One object of the separation, 
no doubt, was to make them feel more sensibly the value of 
fellowship with God's people, and communion with him by 
the help of his ordinances. Whoever would understand 
this subject aright, should study it in the books of Moses, 
especially in Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy, where 
he will see the nature of the obedience required, of the 
things prohibited, and of the penalties alfTxed. One thing 
will be evident from such examination, that very many of 
those prohibitions which appear most trivial, are of things 
which were practised by the nations around, from which 
God adopted this method of separating his people, lest their 
evil manners should corrupt those good ones enjoined on 
his peculiar people. "Come out from among them, and be 
ye separate," was the cry under the law, as it has been 
under the gospel. Often indeed were these laws a dead 
letter, being uninforced, discipline relaxed, and no differ- 
ence put between the evil and the good, the clean and the 
unclean. Then did God most heavily complain by his 



14 



prophets of those who came unworthily to his solemn feasts, 
saying, " What hast thou to do with me, that thou shouldst 
take my covenant within thy mouth." "It is iniquity, 
even the solemn meeting." His soul was weary of his own 
appointed feasts and holy days, by reason of their profana- 
tion. All those customs, practices and ceremonies of the 
nations around, were doubtless, more or less opposed to the 
spirit of the moral law, and therefore also forbidden. But 
beside these prohibitions, God, either by positive statutes, or 
by the voice of his prophets, condemned all manner of sins, 
and punished them by his providence, if not by the priest 
and the ruler. Not merely were atheists, idolaters and mur- 
derers, and the most abandoned of men, of whom there 
seemed no hope, the subjects of law and discipline, but 
those who by the punishment of their lesser transgressions, 
might be kept from greater ones, which might prove their 
ruin. It was as a father that God chastened his children, 
because he loved them. Evil, we repeat again, were those 
days in Israel when rulers were not "a terror to evil doers," 
and " when every man did that which was right in his own 
eyes." 

I will only add one thing as to God's government of the 
Jewish Church. Not adults only, but children were the 
subjects of discipline. Besides their circumcision, and all 
the injunctions given as to instruction in God's law, as to 
parental restraints and corrections, if, at a certain age, they 
did not come forward and own this covenant, and partake of 
the passover, they were regarded as cut off from Israel, — 
their circumcision having become uncircumcision. 

SEC. V.— DISCIPLINE UNDER THE NEW DISPENSATION. 

Let us now see whether this order was changed under the 
Christian dispensation, called the law of liberty, by compar- 
ison with the Jewish, which is styled a yoke of bondage. 
Is it the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, to be 



15 



released from the discipline of his Church, and allowed in 
all things to judge and act as we please? What do we read 
in the New Testament on the subject? Our Lord not only 
recognizes the Jewish priesthood and Jewish courts, as those 
who had rightly exercised discipline, but refers Christians to 
some body called the Church, for the settlement of differ- 
ences among themselves, when other means failed. What 
select portion of the Church may have been here recognized, 
in whose hands discipline is placed, is a subject of dispute 
among Christians. The fact of some ecclesiastical court or 
tribunal is undoubted. St. Paul also, besides exercising it 
himself, enjoins it upon Timothy and Titus to see that it is 
done, and also on the Churches generally, giving some 
directions on the subject. I shall not in this place adduce 
the passages establishing what is affirmed, since they will be 
brought under the two succeeding heads of this charge, for 
other purposes, and because the fact cannot be disputed. 

Let us consider what are the objects of discipline, and 
who are the subjects of it, under the New Testament dis- 
pensation. The two great ends of discipline, are the cor- 
rection of offenders, and the prevention of sin in others, by 
the example of their punishment. Church discipline is not, 
as some seem to suppose, only for reprobates — persons sup- 
posed to be past hope, to have no part or lot in the kingdom 
above, and who should therefore be excluded from that 
below. God has not given it to us to know^ who these are. 
The father corrects the child whom he loves, in order to his 
good, separating him sometimes from the society of other 
children, not only for their good, but lest he should become 
so evil as to render it necessary that he be banished forever 
and disinherited. They are emphatically sons whom the 
father chastens. Wherefore St. Paul, in his 1st Epistle to 
the Corinthians, speaks of "delivering such an one to Satan, 
for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved 
in the day of the Lord Jesus." In the Epistle to Timothy 



16 



also he speaks of some in the following words: a whom I 
have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blas- 
pheme."* In both of which instances, reformation is the 
declared object. Again, in his second Epistle to the Thes- 
salonians, after injoining it upon the faithful to " with- 
draw themselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, 
and not to have any company with him, that he may be 
ashamed," he adds, "yet count him not as an enemy, but 
admonish him as a brother." Such passages should correct 
the error of those who are fearful of exercising any disci- 
pline, even a temporary suspension, lest perchance it should 
be inflicted on one who is a child, though an erring child of 
God. If indeed separating one from the earthly Church for 
a time, were a certain exclusion from the heavenly, we 
might thus argue. But the kingdom of God on earth, and 
that in heaven, are different places. Separating a child of 
God for a time from the earthly kingdom, is one of the 
appointed means of insuring him a place in that above. If 
we are never to exercise discipline on one by suspension, 
until we are sure that he is not in a state of salvation, that 
if thus dying he would be certainly shut out of heaven, 
when should we ever exercise it; for who can say certainly, 

* Note on the words " delivered unto Satan." — Though the determining of the precise 
meaning of these -words does not at all affect our assertion, that discipline is not for rep- 
robates only — the utterly lost ones, if indeed we could know who they are — but also for 
the children of God, who are to be preserved and reclaimed by salutary correction ; yet 
it may not be amiss to consider their probable meaning and the use made of them. Some 
are of opinion that this is only a scriptural expression for the standing ordinance of 
excommunication, and refers to those evil influences of the wicked one, to which those 
persons are particularly subject, who by their sins hare deserved to be cast out of the 
Church, deprived of its ordinances, and exposed to shame among men. For the most 
part, however, the use of the term is confined to those days when God gave to the apostles 
power over the bodies of men, and when Satan was ready to be the executioner, by taking 
possession of them, and afflicting them with various diseases, which bodily punishments, 
called destruction of the flesh, might teach them not to blaspheme, and be one of the 
means of saving their spirits in the day of the Lord. Thus the Lord permitted Satan to 
afflict holy Job, by delivering his body unto him to be tormented for a season. " This 
being the general sense of the ancients," says Bingham, the great antiquarian of the 
Church, " we do not find that they ordinarily made use of this phrase in any of their 
forms of excommunication." 



17 



when the sin amounts to that u which is never to be for- 
given." The Church in her fallible state cannot, with cer- 
tainty, pronounce on any individual anathema maranatha.* 
As to the other object of discipline, the prevention of evil to 
others, by permitting misconduct to go unpunished, it is so 
plain from scripture, and its importance so obvious to all, 
that I shall not dwell upon it, but proceed to speak of some 
of the subjects of it, as specified in scripture. Under the 
present head, I shall mention only one, as the others will 
necessarily appear under the following. 

As in the Jewish Church children were circumcised, and 
thereby became debtors to do the whole law, and at an early 
age come forward, acknowledge this, and partake of the 
passover, so in the Christian, children were baptized, and 
thereby became debtors to receive and obey the gospel, their 
parents being directed to bring them up in the nurture (dis- 
cipline) and admonition of the Lord. The old rule " train 
up a child in the way he should go/ 3 was still the law. In 
that very same way in which their Christian parents, and all 
adults should walk, children should be taught and made to 
follow. They and adult converts were baptized into the 
same faith, in the name of the same Father, Son and Spirit. 
There were not two religions, one for the child to learn and 
practice, and another for adults. Children were not to be 

* On the voords "Anathema Maranatha" — The scrip toral ■word anathema, or accursed, is 
often found in the ancient canons, being used to signify excommunication, or separation 
from the Church and its privileges. The addition of maranatha, which greatly strength- 
ens the sentence, is not often found. It is supposed to mean, that the Lord is come, or 
the Lord will come, or the Lord will come to judgment. He. therefore, on whom the sen- 
tence anathema maranatha is inflicted, is one not only excommunicated from the Church 
on earth, bnt declared to he one whom the Lord has cursed and will destroy for eTer. 

The word shammatha among the Jews, which was used in pronouncing the highest 
sentence on incorrigible offenders, is supposed to correspond to this, and to hare suggested 
it. In process of time, the Christian Church did sometimes venture thus to claim the 
prerogative of him, who alone has power to destroy both body and soul in hell. We 
leave that to the tender mercies of the would be infallible Church of Rome. Protestants, 
while separating offenders from certain privileges of the visible Church for a season, 
leave it to God to determine on their future condition, only warning the impenitent that 
except they repent they will perish foreTer, and that God will banish them with everlast- 
ing destruction from his presence. 



18 



trained in one way, and then when they came of age, to 
leave it for another. St. John, in one of his Epistles, writes 
to little children, young men and fathers, at a time when 
the name children was given to those under twelve years of 
age, and the name young men to those between the age 
of twelve and twenty, and that of fathers to those above 
twenty ; and he makes no difference as to the way in which 
they should walk, or as to the religion they have embraced. 
It is a most fatal mistake which supposes, that children bap- 
tized into the Church of God should be taught and allowed 
many things, which it is confessed they must relinquish as 
improper so soon as they with their own mouths and consent 
profess the religion of Christ; that there is one way for the 
baptized, another for the communicants, baptism setting 
forth one kind of life, and the Lord's supper another. On 
the contrary, the very things which communicants should 
do in order to honor their profession, and make their calling 
and election sure, baptized children should be taught to do, 
as means of preparing them for a full profession in confirma- 
tion and the supper; so also the things which communicants 
should avoid and renounce, lest they draw them back to 
perdition, baptized children should be taught and made to 
avoid and renounce, as hindering their preparation for the 
ordinances, by the attainment of the repentance and faith 
promised for them. Whatsoever is said as to children, both 
under the law and gospel, must be so understood, and pa- 
rents and ministers can only be consistent in thus executing 
the will of God. On parents and such as have the care of 
children, devolves almost entirely the duty of exercising 
godly discipline. They are jure divino ordained ministers 
for this purpose, over the young members of Christ's visible 
Church. 

Let us now consider the sins which are the proper objects 
of discipline, whatever that discipline be, and what is the 
rule by which we are to decide on their character. In so 



19 



doing we ascertain who are the subjects of discipline among 
adults, according to the New Testament. Taking discipline 
in its most comprehensive sense, as now used among us, as 
consisting of private admonition , public reproof, exclusion 
from the Lord's supper, (for with civil pains and penalties 
we have happily nothing to do, these being left to the civil 
magistrate,) it must be admitted that whatsoever sins endan- 
ger the soul, and will, if persisted in, exclude from heaven, 
should be the subjects of discipline on earth, so far as they 
can be reached by it, with any hope of effect. Some there 
are of a high grade in the sight of God, and which will ex- 
clude from heaven, which yet cannot be reached by the 
sentence of exclusion here, and must therefore only be dealt 
with by the warnings of God's word and ministers. There 
are many secret sins, as envy, malice, lust of the heart, etc., 
which, unresisted and unrepented, effectually destroy the 
soul; but it is only when they become open and notorious, 
by words or deeds, that we can touch them by the hand of 
discipline. In this imperfect state of discipline, both in the 
Church and State, great crimes must sometimes go unpun- 
ished, because they cannot be established, while lesser ones 
are punished, because susceptible of proof from their noto- 
riety. But He who sees and knows all things, reserves 
those who escape from men for his own discipline, both here 
and hereafter. This has ever been regarded and used as 
one argument for a future state of retribution. As to those 
things which constitute the evil living on which discipline 
should be exercised, even to exclusion, if necessary, because 
they will, if not repented of and forsaken, exclude from 
heaven, we read in the gospel, of drunkenness, extortion, 
adultery, lying, theft, uncleanness, lasciviousness, revel- 
lings, banquetings and such like. They who do such 
things, says the apostle, shall never enter the kingdom of 
heaven j neither, of course, should they be allowed to con- 
tinue in, and disgrace and defile the Church on earth. 



20 



As to most of the acts which come under one or other 
of the above catalogue, none can justify them, or plead 
exemption from either civil or ecclesiastical penalty. The 
best civil codes in all ages have sentenced them. All 
Churches have made them liable to the discipline thereof. 
But there is a class of offences evidently included in the 
above general description, which both civil and religious 
laws have found more difficult to define and to punish, 
and for which some are more apt to plead, as being improper 
subjects for discipline. They are certain indulgences and 
pleasures in which human nature delights, and is unwilling 
to part with. As to certain grosser and more scandalous 
vices, it is conceded, that they should be forbidden and pun- 
ished, but in regard to those things denominated amuse- 
ments, which are classed under the heads of revellings and 
banquetings by the scripture, and to those called pomps and 
vanities by the Church, they cannot see the great evil of 
them. Now as to such things, the question is, are they in- 
jurious to the soul? Have they a tendency to shut us out 
of the kingdom of heaven? If so, they must be sinful, for 
the wages of sin is death. God will exclude none but sin- 
ners from heaven. What do the scriptures say of those 
things called pleasures? How many are the warnings in 
the Proverbs of Solomon, the Psalms of David, and the 
prophets, against the ruinous effect of what are called pleas- 
ures? What do the New Testament writers say as to 
" lovers of pleasure," a the carnally minded," a the lust of 
the flesh, the lust of the eye and the pride of life;" as to 
the woman who "liveth in pleasure being dead;" as to 
iC denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, and living soberly, 
righteously and godly in this world;" as to young men 
being "sober minded?" So far from scripture being silent as 
to these things, and leaving every one to decide for himself 
— all of them being lawful — there is no class of sins more 
frequently and solemnly denounced, as destructive to the 



21 



soul, than this. A volume, rather than a tract, might be 
drawn from scripture, setting forth instances of such sins, 
the evil of them, — God's displeasure at them. It would be 
a useful employment for one just to collect and publish all 
these, without note or comment, and let the world and 
Church see how much more particular and strict the sacred 
writers are, or rather the Divine Spirit which moved them 
is, than the most strict of God's ministers and Churches are 
at this day. They will be surprised to see how God by his 
prophets and apostles has continued to denounce what seem 
trifles to some, as he did by Moses. We should find not 
merely rioting and drunkenness, but unbecoming motions of 
body, unseemly dress and all lightness, are noticed and con- 
demned. And is not this approved by the consent of all 
mankind? Have not anxious parents and guardians, and 
others, been most fearful of these things for the young com- 
mitted to their charge? Has not the voice of pleasure been 
that voice of the charmer, which has deluded the greatest 
numbers to their undoing. No matter what it be then that 
destroys souls, that is evil, and we must adopt the most 
effectual measures, whatever they may be, for suppressing 
it, in proportion to the danger thereof. 

But it may be asked, by what rule does the gospel teach 
us to decide as to those things which must be regarded as 
sins worthy of the Church's censure? The answer must 
be, the word of God — the whole word of God. There is 
one abridgment of its laws, however, which is the sum and 
substance of all relating to our character and conduct to- 
wards God and man — the moral law, or ten commandments. 
All other scriptures are but explanations and examples of 
this. Our Lord's sermon on the mount, as well as other 
scriptures, teach us how to apply them to our hearts and 
lives. There is not a vice or virtue but must come under 
one of these laws. There is not an action, or indulgence, 
or pleasure, but will be condemned or approved by this law. 



22 



An improper desire, according to this, is adultery, a wrong 
feeling is murder. Of this, however, we shall speak more 
fully when we shew that such has been the use made of it 
in the determination of the proper subjects of discipline, in 
all ages of the Church. We have only to add, under this 
head, that when false doctrines are to be the subject of dis- 
cipline, the word of God is again to be the standard, to 
which the Church must revert in drawing up her creed, by 
which heretics are to be rejected after due admonition. 
The gospel is to furnish our creed, the law our rule of mor- 
als, which rule, however, we find explained and enforced in 
the gospel. 

Let us now briefly consider how and in what spirit disci- 
pline is to be exercised according to the gospel. 

There are various ways according to the nature of the 
offence by which discipline is to be exercised. There is 
private admonition, public rebuke, warning of the danger 
of unworthy receiving, and positive exclusion from the 
Lord's supper. A minister should privately reprove in the 
first instance, when that is more likely to succeed, and the 
offence admits of it. In private he may also explain the 
nature of God's ordinances and the qualifications for them, 
thus preventing the unworthy and unprepared from wishing 
to come, or inducing them to withdraw. Those who sin 
openly, should be openly reproved, according to the apostle, 
if not by name, yet by denouncing the sins of which they 
are guilty. The nature of the Lord's supper, the danger of 
receiving it unworthily, of eating and drinking to our con- 
demnation, should be faithfully set forth, as did St. Paul. 
In this manner many will be deterred from coming ignorant- 
ly, not discerning the Lord's body, or dishonoring their 
profession. When these methods fail, and any be disposed 
to come who live in sin, and bring reproach on the Church, 
then we must see what crimes are specified in scripture as 
subjecting to discipline. We shall find that God by his 



23 



Spirit and word has, from time to time, after the manner of 
all governments, besides laying down general principles, 
specified offences and evil practices as they arose, calling 
them by the names they have assumed. Still, however, as 
it was impossible to make a complete enumeration which 
should comprehend all evil things, such general phrases as 
these are used: "and such like" — "all unrighteousness and 
ungodliness" — "unworthily." It is, therefore, left to the 
Church in all subsequent ages to legislate, and her officers 
to execute according to the spirit of those general principles, 
or particular laws which are in the word. As to the spirit 
in which all discipline is to be exercised, it is the kindest of 
which man is capable. It is to be done in a spirit of meek- 
ness and love, with all long-suffering and patience, with a 
heart ready to break, as was that of the apostle. The 
elders should be reproved as fathers, the younger ones as 
brethren, and even when excluded, so that in some things 
we must not have fellowship with them, but rather with- 
draw ourselves; we must not count them as enemies, but 
rather admonish them as brethren, and seek to restore them, 
considering ourselves lest we also be tempted. 

SECTION VI. — DISCIPLINE OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 

Having thus briefly considered what may be learned on 
this subject from scripture, whether for authority or exam- 
ple, let us see how far the Christian Church, from the days 
of the apostles, has been governed by the same. The 
accounts we have of the first, and part of the second centu- 
ry, are so slight, that we cannot speak with historical 
certainty, but may surely be permitted to believe, that they 
were not unfaithful in obeying the injunctions and following 
the examples of the apostles. That discipline, always 
difficult, was sometimes in a measure neglected, even in the 
earliest days of the Church, may be inferred from the 
trouble which the apostles themselves had, and the disposi- 



24 



tion on the part of some to tolerate offenders; while they 
were yet alive. Converts from Jews and Gentiles, each 
desiring to bring in some things of doctrine and practice to 
which they were attached, gave much trouble, and did 
much injury to the Church for a long time. There was 
action and re-action between Christianity on the one side, 
and Judaism and Paganism on the other. If Christianity 
destroyed the two latter, it was also in some measure cor- 
rupted by them. 

The state of discipline, and the character of any Church or 
civil community, are to be learned not only from the histo- 
ries and other writings of the times, but chiefly from the 
canons and laws of those times. Many canons of the 
third, fourth, and fifth, and sixth centuries, have been trans- 
mitted to us. One code, indeed, professes to be of apostolic 
origin, but though of early date, and contributing something 
to a just exhibition of the early Church, it is generally denied 
the authority to which its name pretends. In examining 
these codes we are forcibly struck with two things. 

1. That there must have been great corruption of morals 
in many of those who were enrolled among Christians, to 
call for canons forbidding such flagrant vices, and such a 
penitential discipline as was adopted. 

2. That there must have been even in the worst times or 
Churches, no little vitality in many of the law-givers, and 
rulers, and people, to enable them to denounce and punish 
such vices, as well as some of less magnitude. 

As to the great corruption of morals, living as the early 
Christians did in the midst of Jews and Gentiles, many of 
them, as we have said, converts from the same, strong was 
the temptation to comply with some of their customs and 
practice some of their vices. This should always be 
remembered by us in forming our estimate of the religion of 
those days. Though corruption did abound, yet God ful- 



25 



filled his word of promise to the Church , and was with her 
so as to keep a sufficient number faithful, to denounce all 
evil principles and practices j to pass wholesome laws; and, 
with more or less fidelity, to enforce them. It will be per- 
ceived that she kept the scriptures of the Old and New 
Testament in view, as to the main features of her discipline, 
though she doubtless sometimes retained what should have 
been abolished and carried too far what was designed to be 
used. For instance, it has been made a complaint, that 
her legislation was too particular, sometimes specifying vices 
or practices too gross to be even mentioned j at others, de- 
scending to things too trivial to be the subjects of legislation, 
and interfering with that liberty wherewith Christ has made 
us free. Now this is precisely the complaint made against 
many of the laws of God for his ancient people. It is said 
that they are either too trivial or else refer to vices which 
ought not to be named. Such persons, if considering the 
condition of the Jewish nation in regard to those around, 
and the reasons influencing Jehovah thus to legislate, would 
not thus find fault. So those who condemn the legislation 
and discipline of the early Christian Church, would do well 
to acquaint themselves with the reasons thereof, growing out 
of their position in the midst of heathen corruptions. Let 
them remember also that the canons of the primitive Church 
were for all the baptized members of the Church, who, at 
that time, whether baptized in infancy or at a later age, 
were immediately confirmed and received the Lord's supper, 
and were henceforth communicants in full membership with 
the Church. 

Only let us imagine our Conventions to be legislating for 
all who were baptized in infancy, and a great change would 
immediately ensue. Laws would be multiplied to include 
the numerous offences committed by the whole population 
of nominal Christians. How much more of reproach, too, 

4 



26 



would be cast upon the Church, if all were considered in 
full membership from their infancy up. # 

Doubtless the primitive Church, however mistaken, 
thought that it was justified in this course by the example 
of the Jewish Church in which, as we have seen, all who 
were circumcised were put under discipline, and regarded as 
God's adopted children, until by their own act or neglect 
they were cut off from Israel. Thus, also, doubtless, 
did they think to obey the injunction of the apostle to 
bring up their children in the nurture as well as admonition 
of the Lord. It will also be seen, that as to the modes of 
exercising discipline, the private and public admonition of 

* Surprising as it may seem to us that the primitive Church should have fallen into 
such an error, as that of administering confirmation and the Lord's supper to infants im- 
mediately after their baptism, and thus enrolling them as communicants, there are some 
in our day whose excessive attachment to ancient times has led them to desire a restora- 
tion of that custom. The intimations to that effect in some of the writings of the Tracta. 
rians are not to be misunderstood. They may perhaps reason, as some in early times 
perhaps did, that children being unconscious subjects of an ordinance, can present no bar 
or obstacle to its spiritual efficacy, and therefore are all certainly regenerated at baptism 
in the highest sense, and if in baptism, may not the same be true of the grace of confirm- 
ation and of the Lord's supper, and is it not safest to administer these also at once, and thus 
secure all the blessings of God's appointments to the new-born child. If the child then 
receives baptismal grace, and the grace of confirmation, and of the Eucharist, surely it 
must be regarded in the highest sense as the child of God, and must be treated as such, 
and regarded as the true representative of our religion. Those who think it indispensa- 
ble to a faithful and effectual use of religious education, that we regard all baptized child- 
ren as in the highest sense the new-born children of God, must see that the ancients who 
thought they received not only baptismal grace, but confirming and eucharistic grace in 
their infancy, had still greater reason to regard the children of the Church as having all the 
fullness of grace in them, and to expect to be on that account successful in their efforts 
to preserve them as temples of the Holy Ghost. The children of the Church in those 
ages, when such was the belief and practice, ought certainly to have been the best that 
ever were on earth, and their succession ought never to have failed. But why, if such 
were the case, the extreme corruption which soon came upon the Church, at least on 
great numbers of those called Christians, and why the necessity of so many laws and so 
much discipline ? The number of nominal Christians by whom the religion of Christ was 
judged, was also increased in another way besides this infant confirmation and commu- 
nion. Jews and Gentiles even at a very early age, if expressing a desire to become Christ- 
ians, were admitted to be catechumens by the imposition of hands, and allowed to attend 
certain services. Not only this, but they also were called Christians; said to be "sancti- 
fied after a certain manner;" were subject to discipline; liable, for certain sins, to be put 
back to a lower degree and kept from baptism for a longer or shorter period. They also 
represented the Church, being Christians in distinction from Jews and Gentiles, whose 
religion they had renounced. See Canons of the early Church, and Bingham's Anti- 
quities. 



27 



offenders, the general laws of determining the sins to be 
punished, and the specifications of offences from time to 
time, they sought to make scripture their model. That the 
Church in those days was fallible, as it has been ever since, 
and made great mistakes, its fondest admirers must admit. 
Some things which were actually done, and other things 
which were attempted by it, doubtless proceeded from false 
views of some part of the Christian system, and laid the 
foundation for great corruptions in doctrine and practice. 
Much also that was done in the way of law and discipline 
under the influence of right views, and in a right spirit, 
would be either useless, or altogether inexpedient, or even 
madness now, in the changed circumstances of the times. 
But let us beware how we deal out a wholesale condemna- 
tion of her well meant efforts, lest we be found to censure 
some things which God approved and blessed.* In proof 
of the false judgment which is often passed upon many of 
the canons of the early Churches, through ignorance or 
inconsideration of the reasons for their adoption, I will men- 
tion only one instance. By some of the early canons, it 
was forbidden to fast on the Lord's day, or to kneel in the 
prayers of that day, it being regarded as a day of holy re- 
joicing. This seems an unwarrantable interference with 
conscience and Christian liberty; but if we examine into 
the reason for it, we shall find that an important principle 
was concerned. The Judaizers in the Church still adher- 
ing to their own Sabbath, condemned the Christian Sab- 
bath, and sought to put contempt on it by fasting and 
kneeling down, and thus treating it as a day of humiliation 

* Mr. Taylor, in his Ancient Christianity, which is the most unfavorable work I know 
of, as to the early Church, nevertheless, admits that mingled with incipient errors on the 
subject of celibacy, the priesthood and sacraments, which afterwards developed themselves 
bo sadly, there was much of most sincere and zealous piety in very many of the early 
Christians. If all who were baptized were to be reckoned as the representatives of our 
holy religion, doubtless there were then, as ever since, a large number of most unworthy 
ones. 



28 



instead of rejoicing. It is thus we may explain and justify 
very many of the early canons which seem strange to us in. 
this day. Having made these general observations on what 
our mother Church speaks of, as "The godly discipline of 
the primitive Church ; " and on the sincere, zealous, though 
sometimes mistaken piety of the same, let us proceed to a 
more particular consideration of some of the canons which 
justify us in what has been said. We shall select those 
which relate to some things which certain professing Christ- 
ians, in all ages, have attempted lo plead for as allowable. 

In the Laodicean canons, passed in 367, it is decreed that 
Christians ought not to use wanton dancing at their wed- 
dings, but to have a modest dinner and supper. That they 
of the priesthood and clergy (those called the clergy being 
inferior officers in the Church, as singers, readers, etc.,) 
ought not to gaze on fine shows at weddings or other feasts, 
but before the musicians enter to rise up and retreat. 
"That they of the priesthood and clergy, or even the laity, 
ought not to club together for great eating and drinking 
bouts." These latter were probably among those things 
which St. Paul denominated "revelings, banquetings, etc." 
In the African code of 418 it is ordered, " Let not the sons 
of clergymen (that is of the inferior ministers of the sanctu- 
ary,) manage public shows, nor even be spectators of them; 
and it has always been enjoined on all Christians, that they 
go not where blasphemy is used." " That clergymen do 
not go to victualling houses to eat or drink, but only upon 
necessity on their travels." These places were doubtless 
much abused, as many in these days are. " That reconcili- 
ation (that is admission to the communion,) be not denied 
to actors or stage players, or apostates on their conversion." 
All such persons were by canon excluded on account of 
their profession. "That if any one desire to forsake any 
ludicrous exercise, and become a Christian, no one be al- 
lowed to tempt or force him to such exercise." It seems 



29 



that to become a Christian, involved the necessity of forsak- 
ing such things. All parents and older Christians should 
think of this in relation to their children and the younger 
ones of the Church. 

THE TKIJLLAN CANONS OF 683. 

These forbid making lascivious pictures — acting of farces 
— baiting beasts with clogs— dancing on the stage — the lewd 
festivities on the Kalends— attending feasts in honor of the 
god Pan — the public mystic dancings, both of men and 
women — tragical and comical masks — that either sex wear 
the habit of the other — also the bacchanalian feasts: on pain 
of deposition to the clergy and excommunication to the 
laity. Those called apostolical canons, and which are of 
doubtful date, being by some ascribed to the second century, 
say, u Let the Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, who spends his 
time in dice or drinking, either desist, or be deposed, the 
sub-deacon, reader, singer or layman, be excommunicated." 

TESTIMONIES OF BINGHAM AXD CAVE. 

The following passages from Bingham's Antiquities of 
the Christian Church, and Cave's Primitive Christianity, 
will add force to these canons and to the remarks preceding 
and accompanying them. Mr. Bingham, in various places 
of his sixth volume, refers to the ancient canons as forbid- 
ding the public shows, games, theatres, dancings, etc., and 
says that they were condemned for two reasons: — 1st, be- 
cause they were against the spirit of the second and seventh 
commandments, which forbid all encouragement of idola- 
try, and all impurity; both of which attended these exhibi- 
tions. 2ndly. Because they w T ere the very works of the 
devil, and the pomps and vanities of the world, w T hich they 
renounced at their baptism as ministering to the sinful lusts 
of the flesh. "All who had any concern in the exercise or 
management of these unlawful sports, and all frequenters of 



30 



them, were obliged either to quit these practices, or be liable 
to excommunication, so long as they continued to follow 
them, not only because a great deal of impurity and cruelty 
was committed in them, but also because they contributed 
to the maintenance of idolatry, which was an appendage to 
them. All these were comprised in the pomp and service 
of the devil, which every Christian had renounced at his 
baptism." — vol. vii, p. 191. Even the holding such offices 
under the civil government, where the heathen had rule, as 
required them to have anything to do with such things, was 
forbidden; or if the offices were accepted, those holding them 
were debarred communion during the term of office. The 
plea of curiosity, he says, was not allowed as sufficient ex- 
cuse for witnessing a heathen sacrifice; a servant, however, 
attending his master on duty was excused. Bingham also 
shows that the writing or reading of lascivious books and 
plays was forbidden, and mentions an instance of a Bishop 
who wrote one, and was deprived of his office because he 
would not recant it. He shows, in like manner, that im- 
modest apparel and decoration were forbidden to Christians. 
In vol. iii, we have a particular account of the baptismal 
renunciation, from various authors. One of the forms, ac- 
cording to St. Ambrose, was, u I renounce the devil and his 
works, the world and its luxury and pleasures." Another, 
according to St. Jerome, was, " I renounce thee Satan 3 and 
thy pomp, and thy vices, and thy world." Sometimes, he 
says, u the games and shows, which were part of the devil's 
pomp, were expressly mentioned in this form of renuncia- 
tion," as it is in Salvian: u l renounce the devil, his pomps, 
and his shows, and his works;" and this was after idolatry 
was removed from the public shows. The same form sub- 
stantially has continued to this day in the Christian Church, 
and is meant to condemn substantially the same vain, lewd 
and improper things. If not, then is it an unmeaning ser- 
vice. Moreover, the ancients always traced it to the time of 



31 



St. Peter, who speaks of " the answer of a good conscience 
towards God " as being the saving thing in baptism. At the 
time, however, that idolatry ceased, though lewdness still 
remained in their public entertainments, the Church had 
become degenerate, discipline was relaxed, though the can- 
ons were the same; and in many instances, the only opposi- 
tion made to worldly conformity, was the faithful denuncia- 
tion of these things by those Bishops, priests and laymen, 
who themselves continued faithful. Some such there ever 
have been, making an uninterrupted stream of testimony on 
the part of the Church against these things. In proof that 
very many of the early Christians were, from principle and 
in practice, opposed to such things, though discipline was 
needful to restrain many, especialty when all catechumens 
and all the baptized, who then also became communicants, 
though infants, were to be governed, I adduce a few pas- 
sages from Cave's History of the Early Christians. After 
speaking of the simplicity of their manners, dress and enter- 
tainments, he says, "Nor were they more studious of pleas- 
ures and recreations abroad, than they were of fineness and 
bravery at home. They went not to public feasts, nor fre- 
quented the public shows, that were made for the disport 
and entertainment of the people, and this was so notorious, 
that the heathen charged it upon them as part of their 
crime." Observe how he, in Minutius Felix, draws it up: 
"The Romans (says he) govern and enjoy the world, while 
you in the meantime are careful and mopish, abstaining 
even from lawful pleasures; you visit not the shows, nor are 
present at the pomps, nor frequent the public feasts; you 
abhor the holy games, the sacrificial meats and drinks, 
crown not your heads with garlands, nor perfume your 
bodies with sweet odours, — a ghastly, fearful and miserable 
people." To which it is replied, "that they could not be 
present at such places without affronting their modesty, and 
offering: a distaste and horror to their minds;" that at their 



32 



baptism they had solemnly engaged "to renounce the devil 
and all his works, pomps and pleasures; that is, says St. 
Cyril, the sights and sports of the theatre, and such like 
vanities." It appears then, that the primitive Church, after 
the example of the apostles, specified not merely the grosser 
vices about which there was no dispute, but also certain 
pleasurable ones, for which some have always pleaded. It 
appears also, that after the example of the apostolic ruleis 
and law-givers, she often concluded the specification with 
some general terms, " such like," &c, comprehending 
offences of the same class. 

We shall find also, that, as has already been hinted at, 
the young, the very young, were the subjects of discipline, 
the nurture of the Lord, as enjoined in the Old and New 
Testaments. Even before they were baptized, if Jewish or 
Gentile children, they might at an early age become cate- 
chumens and come under the discipline of the Church. At 
what age those who were baptized in infancy were held re- 
sponsible, as older communicants were, is not specified, for 
it was impossible to say when they become responsible be- 
fore God. In answer to that question, we find one of the 
canons of Timothy, Bishop of Alexandria, thus deciding: 
ee According to every one's capacity and understanding — to 
one at ten, to another when older." The discipline of 
children was chiefly placed in the hands of parents. One 
of the canons of the African Church commands that " Bish- 
ops and clergy do not emancipate their children, so as to 
permit them to live at their own discretion, until they be 
well assured of their good government of themselves." 
That is a canon which should be repeated from age to age 
in every Church, for the benefit of all parents. In none is 
it more needed than in our day, especially in reference to all 
worldly indulgences, as to which the children are allowed to 
dictate to the parents. 

As to the spirit and manner of exercising discipline in the 



33 



primitive Church we shall see that the rule of our Lord and 
the apostles was followed. The danger of unworthy com- 
muning was continually set forth. Private admonition, 
except in cases not admitting of it, was first resorted to. 
Then the lesser excommunication, or temporary separation. 
Then the greater excommunication. The ministers were 
enjoined to use great prudence and tenderness. In one of 
the Trullan canons it is written: "They who have the 
power of binding and loosing, and are intrusted with the 
principal pastorship, must consider the quality of the of- 
fence, and the disposition of the penitent, and temper the 
spiritual medicine according to St. Basil's rule, viz: where 
rigor will not do, use as much tenderness as the practice of 
the Church will allow of." Nor were the private members 
of the Church entirely subject to the will of one individual, 
without any right of appeal. The dioceses were then so 
numerous and so small, that the Bishops exercised all disci- 
pline in the first place; but by the Nicene canon, in every 
province, the Bishops of the same met together twice a year 
"that examination might be made whether any had been 
excommunicated by the too great severity or rashness of the 
Bishop." Afterwards we find a canon in one of the 
Churches, appointing a council of three Bishops for this 
purpose, that the others might not be taken so much from 
their dioceses. 

We have thus considered the main features of the primi- 
tive discipline, which we doubt not was honestly designed to 
carry out the principles and follow the example of God's 
government of the Jewish and of the apostolic Church. 
We say nothing of the penitentiary discipline, by which 
certain offences were punished, by more or less of exclusion 
from the very temples of religion for a term, sometimes a 
long term of years. This appears to us the most unac- 
countable and indefensible of all part3 of it, one which we 
must suppose originated in error, and led to much worse 
5 



34 



error. It was thus, perhaps, they thought to fulfill the 
words, that "sinners should not stand in the congregation of 
the righteous.'"' The public confession of sins before the 
congregation to which such blessings were promised through 
prayer and absolution, was found to produce great evil, by 
leading some to confess acts unknown to others, and the 
disclosure of which was calculated to promote strife and 
scandal. It was therefore abandoned. Such disclosures 
were forbidden. Open and notorious evil living, a term 
much used since, and specifying rather the publicity than 
the nature and degree of the transgression, was the only 
sinning to be punished. Still the desire for priestly absolu- 
tion was then so strong, that it soon led to private auricular 
confession, with its absolution, in which the most secret sins 
might be disclosed to the confessor, and absolved on such 
terms as he should dictate, without the public scandal and 
many evils of public confessions. Private confession and 
absolution, with the penance enjoined, soon took the place 
of primitive discipline, and helped, with other things, to 
complete the corruption of the Church, and prepare the 
way for the great apostacy of Mahomet, which, if it had 
not ministered so much to the corrupt propensities of our 
nature, and opposed itself so entirely to the monastic system, 
might have swept away yet more of professing Christendom. 
A flood of licentiousness now poured itself over the Church 
of God. The Sabbath day was reduced to half its period ; 
so far as even the form of religion was concerned, the 
remainder being devoted to sports and games, largely par- 
taking of the spirit of those which the early Church had 
condemned on all days. At length came on the Reforma- 
tion, whose voice was as thunder, in denouncing the entire 
perversion of the apostolic and primitive institution of disci- 
pline both as to ministers and people. As we have already 
said, the claim of the Romish Church, to be even a part of 
the Church of Christ, came now to be questioned by many, 



35 



not more for her want of sound doctrine, than for the ab- 
sence of all godly discipline and the prevalence of most 
corrupt manners. One only exception was there to this 
general corruption. The Church in the wilderness, the 
persecuted Waldenses, and those included in that name, 
alone presented any thing like a pure Church of God. 
Simple manners, holy 'living and a pure faith, were kept 
amongst them by means of the free use of the sacred scrip- 
tures, the right understanding and use of the sacraments, 
and a godly discipline. 

SEC. VII. — DISCIPLINE OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 

The history of our mother Ghurch is so closely connected 
with that of our own, that it must be both interesting and 
useful to study it well. The history of its discipline is a 
painful, though not unprofitable one. Whatever may have 
been the case with the Church on the continent, the cir- 
cumstances attending the reformation of that of England 
were peculiarly unfavorable to the establishment of a pure 
discipline either for clergy or people. In the mysterious 
providence of God, a most licentious king, Henry VIII, was 
used as the chief instrument for casting off the Papal 
yoke, and establishing religious independence in Great 
Britain. Availing himself of his position and means, he 
not only retained the title of Defender of the Faith, given 
him by the Pope, but made himself Supreme Head of the 
Church, tiansmitting the same to his successors on the 
throne. By the second canon of the Church of England, 
it is declared that the king of England is what godty kings 
among the Jews and Christian Emperors in the primitive 
Church were: cc Supreme defenders of the faith, etc" 
and any who denied it were excommunicated. Henry not 
only assumed these titles, but exercised the authority con- 
veyed by them. He busied himself in all that was done, 
and exercised his royal veto at pleasure. Cranmer and all 



36 



his valiant host were obliged to yield to him in many things. 
To excommunicate him for his evil ways was impossible, 
as it has been thus to do with any of his successors. The 
State became supreme. Its chief officers, the heads of 
colleges, fellows and undergraduates, were ex officio com- 
municants, whatever their characters might be. The king 
and Parliament had a veto on all the acts of the convocation, 
while convocations existed, and must confirm their acts in 
order to their validity. Bishops instead of being chosen, as 
in the better days of the Church, by ministers and people, 
were appointed by the crown. The ancient synods com- 
posed of the Bishop and his Presbyters and certain laymen, 
which met once or twice a year to confer about the Church 
and its discipline in each diocese, were laid aside, and a 
much less effective system substituted. The Reformers 
mourned over this defect in the Reformation, longed and 
hoped for better days. Cranmer himself drew up a system 
which was published, but never adopted. A lamentation 
for this evil was introduced into one of the services of the 
Church of England. In her commination office she speaks 
of a certain godly discipline of the primitive Church, and 
wishes it might be restored. Whether one part, especially 
referred to, could, with advantage, be restored or not, still 
we see in this declaration her desire for godly discipline and 
confession, that therein she was wanting. Certain meas- 
ures were proposed and attempted in place thereof, but 
Bishop Pilkington mourns over the inefficiency of the same, 
and says, all granted that discipline was necessary, and 
desired to have it; that which was proposed, however, was 
like a spider's web, so gentle that the rich would not care 
for it, but would live as they list; that the laws and the 
officers appointed to execute them would be despised; 
"that there were few able men to be found who would dare 
to wrestle with the rich in correction." In this connection 
he alludes to the case of Ambrose and Theodosius, the 



37 



latter, though an Emperor, being suspended from the com- 
munion by the former for some great crime. Concerning 
which, the Bishop says: "And how humbly he obeyed it; 
but whether was more to be praised he that durst do it, or 
the other that would obey it, I cannot tell." He carefully, 
however, distinguishes this from those acts of excommuni- 
cation by proud Popes, exercising their authority for far 
other purposes.* That the early Reformers condemned 
those sins of every class which the fathers did, and that 
they brought them to the same test, viz: the moral law, 
understood in its spirit as well as letter, and to the baptismal 
renunciations, is most evident from their writings which 
have come down to us.f As to the grosser sins none will 
doubt; as to some others, let the following suffice. Thomas 
Becon, chaplain to Archbishop Cranmer, says, that the 
seventh commandment forbids, among other things, reading 
of amorous books, idle jesting, vain pastimes, idleness, ban- 
quetings, evil company, as provocations to lust: because St. 
Paul says, "let no flltl:^ communication proceed out of 
your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying." 
"Notable," he says, "is the saying of Tobias' wife: I have 
not kept company with those who have spent their time in 

* Archbishop Sandys says : — " The rod is as necessary in the hands of the pastor as the 
staff." He presses the duty of discipline on both civil and religious rulers, after the ex- 
ample of Nehemiah, who blamed the rulers for certain things which grieved him sore, 
because they dishonored God — also after the example of Christ, who drove quite out of 
the temple those who profaned it. He condemns Baron, a dissolute and careless high 
priest, who permitted the inferior priests to frequent games and heathenish exercises to 
the disgrace of their calling. 

f It is a well known fact, that in all the Catechisms, whether in the Episcopal or other 
Churches of the Reformation, and they abounded, the moral law was so expounded as, 
under the seventh commandment, to forbid all things which directly or indirectly tempted 
to adultery. So, indeed, do all faithful explanations of it. How could any other be 
given with our Lord's sermon on the mount before us ? Even our own very brief Cate- 
chism explains it as enjoining "temperance, soberness and chastity." All explanations 
also of the baptismal vows in Episcopal Catechisms have pursued the same method, bring- 
ing the same sins under their condemnation. Bishop Hooper, in his explanation, says of 
Ine and improper dressing, that there maybe "an adultery of apparel." None more 
decided on this subject than Archb.shop Cranmer on the seventh commandment. 



38 



sport, nor been partakers with them of a light behaviour." 
He enjoins it on young women to avoid idleness, and to be 
engaged in diligent employment — "not to run about unto 
vain spectacles, games, pastimes, plays, interludes, etc. — 
not to keep company with vain, light and wanton persons, 
whose delight is in singing, dancing, skipping, playing, 
etc." Extravagance and immodesty in dress also is con- 
demned. Speaking of Christmas festivals, he says: a These 
be no Christmas banquets, but Christless and devilish ban- 
quets. They be not feasts for Christian men, but for Gen- 
tiles and Ethnicks." Again, a Use not the company of a 
woman who is a player and dancer, and hear her not lest 
thou perish through her enticing." Idleness, as leading to 
licentiousness, is classed under the seventh commandment. 
Becon also condemns sumptuous funerals as exhibiting the 
pomps and vanities of the world; quoting one of the fathers 
who said, u Our Lord arose naked from the grave and his 
followers ought not to desire superfluous and unprofitable 
cost, proud and vain charges." " Simply, not sumptuous- 
ly, honestly, not honorably (that is, expensively), let me be 
buried." It is pleasing to observe how this sentiment was 
felt and acted out by the late Q,ueen Adelaide of England. 
During her life she had been a most exemplary Christian, 
abounding in alms-deeds and good works — at her death she 
requested that her funeral should be conducted in the most 
simple manner, not with that expense and parade which she 
considered among the pomps and vanities that she had re- 
nounced at her baptism; which request was faithfully com- 
plied with by order of the present Q,ueen. But the private 
sentiments and faithful preaching of the Reformers, did 
not avail to cleanse the Church of the corruption of morals 
and manners which had been settling upon it for ages. A 
large number of her clergy were either infected with Ro- 
manism, or ignorant and feeble. Romish manners still 
prevailed to a great extent, and especially those sports 



39 



which desecrated the holy Sabbath. Many would assemble 
together from different parishes and spend the afternoons of 
the Sabbath in all kinds of merry making and games. In 
the time of Edward YI, injunctions were issued against 
them. At different times, in successive reigns, some of the 
judges in the districts ordered their suppression, and directed 
the ministers to read the order in their Churches. The 
effort for their suppression was renewed in the reign of 
James I, but all that could be gotten from him, was to 
issue a book of sports declaring what were lawful amuse- 
ments, and forbidding any to go out of their own parishes 
to use them, allowing them to indulge in the same in the 
Church yards and houses around. The sports allowed 
were dancing, vaulting, archery, feasts of dedication, 
Church ales, clerk ales, bid ales. The object of the feasts 
and ales was to raise money to beautify the Churches, to 
pay the clerk, to set up poor, decayed persons by the 
money raised on such occasions. Those who provided the 
feasts and sold the ale received liberal custom and reward. 
The plea put in for these sports and feasts was, that it 
brought more people to Church on those days than could be 
otherwise gotten; that it increased charity to the poor, pro- 
duced good feeling among the people, and led to the recon- 
ciling of differences. See Burns' Ecclesiastical Law, 1 and 
2 volumes. Those who opposed them, declared that they 
produced strife, bioils, intemperance and profaneness. And 
if these were not the consequences of such assemblages and 
merry makings, human nature must have been very differ- 
ent then from what it is now, or ever had been before. 
The attempt at suppressing them by some of the judges in 
their districts, was renewed in the time of Charles I and 
Archbishop Laud. Complaints being made of them to the 
king, he renewed the order of his father as to the book of 
sports, and commanded that every clergyman in the king- 
dom should read it from the pulpit. Some refused to do it, 



40 



and were ejected from their livings. Others read it, and 
then read the fourth commandment after it. This order 
was aftei wards repealed; and laws for the better observance 
of the Sabbath were passed. This controversy in the time 
of Charles I renewed a discussion which had before been 
carried on, concerning the obligation of the Sabbath as a 
part of the moral law. It will surprise some in our day to 
know, that those who considered themselves the truest 
Churchmen went so far in opposing the strict observance of 
the Sabbath. There were ihose who were jealous of its 
interference with the claims of other holy days of the 
Church. If Archbishop Laud did not counsel the king to 
renew the book of sports, as has been charged upon him, it 
is certain that he and his adherents did oppose themselves to 
those who sought to promote the contrary use of that day. 
This may readily be accounted for in a good measure by 
the violence of party spirit, which was now at its height, 
between the Puritans and other members of the Church. 
That there was error on both sides in many things we doubt 
not; and that even as to the Sabbath the Puritans may have 
carried their views to an excess, while the advocates of such 
an use of it as the book of sports allowed, cannot be de- 
fended.* It is worthy of remark, that some of those in. 

* So violent were the prejudices of dissatisfied Puritans and strenuous Churchmen towards 
each other in those days, that it is difficult from any histories or other writings to form a 
true estimate of their real or comparative merit. The author of this charge has long since 
determined to take as his guide and authority above all others, the testimony of the good, 
the great, the pious, Sir Matthew Hale, as found in some few pages of his life and wri- 
tings. Sir Matthew Hale lived during the most painfully interesting period of the Eng- 
lish history, and from his intimacy with Puritans, Non-conformists and Churchmen, and 
the high esteem in which he was held by all, may be trusted beyond any other, for accu- 
racy of knowledge and soundness of judgment. Though differing much from him in the- 
ological matters, he defended Archbishop Laud when on his trial, and would have defended 
king Charles, if defence had been permitted, as he thought that both of them were unjust- 
ly dealt with, though both greatly in fault. He was intimate with Bishop Wilkins, and 
Tillotson, and Mr. Baxter, and labored hard to get through Parliament a bill of compre- 
hension which he had drawn up, by which to reconcile differences. As to the Churchmen, 
he thought they were too severe in the course pursued towards the Puritans. As to the 
Puritans, he thought " they were good men, but had narrow souls, who would break the 
peace of the Church about such inconsiderable matters as the points in difference were." 



41 



England, who show such a partiality for Laudian Church 
principles, and such a veneration for antiquity, have mani- 
fested a leaning to this very thing. As the primitive Church 
forbade fasting on the Lord's day, because a day of rejoicing, 
and Rome assigns one-half of it to merry making, they 
would relax also, and yield something to the calls of human 
nature for light amusements on that day. One of their 
leaders in the British Parliament, ha3 either written a book 
or made some motion to that effect within the last few years. 

What I have said must show that w T e cannot look to the 
Church of England as an example of godly discipline, and 
yet we may find much in it to strengthen our conviction of 
its importance, and much to effect in its unavoidable absence 
that which discipline is designed to promote. God employs 
various instruments for effecting one and the same object, so 
that if one is out of place, others may succeed to it, and do 
some of its duty, if it cannot accomplish all. Archbishop 
Sandys says, "There be three ways for guarding the vine- 
yard of the Lord — 1st. The faithful preaching of the word; 
2ndly. The holy conversation of ministers ; 3rdly. The dis- 
cipline of the Church." "This last net," as he calls it, 
will take hold, when the two former fail. It held that in- 
cestuous Corinthian whom no other way could have taken." 
Now let us see how she has endeavored to perform her duty 
in all these respects, and how far succeeded. 

1st. She commands her ministers faithfully to preach the 
whole word of God, and read the same to the people, where- 
by their souls may be converted to God, and thus built up 
in him. Especially does she make them give faithful views 

As to the disputes about the Sabbath and the proper mode of spending it, he was entirely 
against those loose Churchmen who so shamefully profaned it, being a most strict ob- 
server of it, leaving behind him a strong testimony concerning the benefits of its due 
celebration. His letters to his grand-children show that he had no sympathy for light 
and trifling pastimes, games of chance, etc. As to the theatre, his condemnation is very 
strong, and his example in renouncing it at eighteen years of age is worthy to be fol- 
lowed. 

6 



42 



of the sacraments, and the danger of receiving them un- 
worthily. See how her article on the subject of the Lord's 
sapper, and her whole communion service (the same with 
our own), warn against the unworthy receiving, and bid 
various descriptions of sinners by name not to come, lest it 
be to their condemnation. This cannot but produce great 
effect in deterring the unworthy. Such was the preaching 
of the early Reformers. See also how this was done in the 
Homilies which were ordered to be read in all the Churches. 
In the Homily on the worthy receiving of the supper it is 
declared, that 16 newness of life and godliness of conversa- 
tion" are required of those who partake, as was the case 
with those who partook of the sacraments of Moses, some 
of whom God overthrew because " they coveted after evil 
things." It is declared that we must u be pure from all 
filthiness of flesh and spirit, lest we eat and drink our own 
condemnation." It declares that eC here be tokens of pure- 
ness and innocency of life, whereby we may perceive that 
we ought to purge our souls from all uncleanness, iniquity 
and wickedness, lest when we eat this mystical bread, as 
Origen saith, we eat in an unclean place, that is, in a soul 
defiled and polluted with sin." Again, " we both read in 
St. Paul that the Church at Corinth was scourged of the 
Lord for misusing the Lord's supper ; and we may plainly 
see Christ's Church there nine years miserably vexed and 
oppressed for the horrible profanation of the same. Where- 
fore let us all, universal and singular, behold our own lives 
and manners to amend them." Otherwise, "it must needs 
come to pass that as wholesome meat received into a sour 
stomach corrupteth and marreth all, and is the cause of fur r 
ther sickness; so shall we eat this bread and drink this cup 
to our eternal destruction." Again, " Why cried the Dea- 
con in the primitive Church, If any be holy let him draw 
near? Was it not because this table received no unholy, 
unclean, or sinful guests?" Thus did all the Reformers 



43 



preach. Bishop Hooper says, to the unworthy , "the sacra- 
ments be not profitable, but damnable." Becon quotes 
Hirome as saying, "All that be lovers of pleasure more 
than lovers of God, eat not the flesh and drink not the blood 
of Christ." And St. Cyprian as saying, "none do eat of 
this lamb but the true Israelites;" and himself says, "as 
corporal meat, if it find a stomach occupied with adverse 
and corrupt humors, doth hurt the more," so "this spiritual 
meat, if it find any man polluted with malignity and evil, 
shall destro)" him the more, not of the own nature of it, but 
through the fault of him that receiveth it." It is thus that 
numbers of holy men ever since the Reformers, preached 
in warning words to the unworthy, while all, even the most 
faithless of her ministers, have been obliged to preach from 
the desk and chancel what the Bible and Prayer Book speak 
on the subject of unworthy receiving. 

2ndly. How much has been done by the holy conversa- 
tion of faithful men, whose lips .and lives have privately 
warned the wicked against a false profession and unworthy 
living. How solemn are the ordination vows of her minis- 
ters, how sacred the promise to preach the word faithfully 
and administer the sacraments rightly. Much has been done 
in this way also towards the promotion of true piety and the 
establishment of correct views of the communion. What 
an invaluable blessing we have in our Liturgy and the word 
of God publicly used, and what a help in the private inter- 
course of the minister with his people, especially with the 
young, in training them up so as not to need the rude hand 
of discipline, or even the kind voice of warning. 

Srdly. But our mother Church is not without her code of 
discipline, which, of itself, however embarrassed in its exe- 
cution, is not without its effect. She has her canons for 
clergy as well as laity, and her positive rubrics specifying 
and enjoining discipline, in close connection with the very 
words of the service. She commands the minister not to 



44 



suffer the evil liver to approach, and thereby commands him 
also not to draw near. In her canons, besides repeating the 
general directions of the rubric, she is sometimes more par- 
ticular. She declares in one of her canons on godly con- 
versation in her ministers, " that they should be examples to 
the people to live well and christianly; " "that they should 
not resort to taverns or ale houses for other than honest ne- 
cessities;" u that they should not spend their time idly, by 
day or by night, playing at dice, cards, or tables, or any 
other unlawful games." Moreover, she has appointed lay 
officers, called Church Wardens, Sidesmen, Questmen, to 
present all offenders among the laity to the Ordinary. Be- 
sides specifying a number of the greater crimes, it is added, 
or "any other uncleanness and wickedness of life," thus, 
not binding the informers or executors of discipline to the 
mere names of sins, which might be changed to avoid pen- 
alty. Moreover, to show what use she wished to make of 
private admonition and warning, and to put to shame the 
unworthy, she orders in one of her canons that before every 
communion, either on the preceding day or on the morn- 
ing thereof, every one desiring to partake shall inform the 
minister of such his desire. None can question that the de- 
sign of this was to facilitate and ensure the keeping of un- 
worthy persons from the Lord's table, for their own and the 
Church's sake, by the opportunity it afforded of private 
advice, warning and prohibition. That law enforced, how 
many unworthy ones would rather withdraw from the com- 
munion than subject themselves to this private ordeal. This 
part of discipline, which is only required in our Diocese on 
one occasion, that is, before the first approach to the table, 
was thus required on every occasion. However inconve- 
nient and difficult of execution, and however much neg- 
lected, it still remains among the canons in evidence of the 
sense and wishes of the English Church on the subject. It 
may be further remarked, that in a country where Church 



45 

and State were united, and the latter predominant, and 
where all were expected, and many were required to com- 
mune under certain penalties, and in order to office, the 
civil magistrate was expected to execute the laws of Parlia- 
ment, which legislated for Christians as citizens. The Re- 
formers dwell much on this, and refer to the Old and New 
Testaments in calling on the rulers to be " a terror to evil 
doers," and bidding all to obey them in the Lord. 

One other feature I would refer to in the scheme of dis- 
cipline of the English Church, in which she agrees with the 
Jewish, Apostolic and Primitive Church, which is, that it is 
not designed to force men to religion who have none, nor to 
punish those only who are lost ones and cast aways, as to 
all human appearance, but for the children of the kingdom, 
as well as pretenders. One of the Reformers quotes Ter- 
tuliian as saying, "It is not religion to force a religion 
which ought to be willingly received." Another quotes 
Cyprian as saying, "The object of discipline is to make us 
perpetually to abide in Christ and live to God." Where- 
fore he says, not only "gravissima et extrema delicta — the 
greatest and most heinous of crimes — sed minora delicta — 
the less ones were punished, so cutting off sin in its bud, 
and by the excision of its less acts and ebullitions, prevent- 
ing its more gross and scandalous eruptions." The two 
great objects of discipline are set forth in the English Com- 
mination service, which declares that the subjects of it "are 
to be punished in this world, that their souls might be saved 
in the day of the Lord 5 and that others, admonished by 
their example, might be the more afraid to offend." Such 
are almost the words, and altogether the doctrine of the 
Apostles. 

But now it may be asked, if there have been all these 
guards and fences, these cherubims and seraphims with 
flaming swords, around our mother Church, to prevent the 
admission of the unworthy to the Lord's supper; if all these 



46 



provisions are made for the exercise of godly discipline on 
those who have been admitted; if the clergy, by canon and 
by their solemn ordination vows, are required to be such 
examples to the laity, especially in their abstinence from 
worldly dissipation; how is it that there have been, almost 
from the first years of the Reformation, such heavy com- 
plaints against the Church, for the misconduct of both min- 
isters and people, especially the former; that her own best 
friends have acknowledged it and mourned over it; that 
reformation has been ever called for and promised; that so 
many secessions on this very ground have taken place for 
more than two centuries; that Tractarians, who boast them- 
selves the only true Churchmen, and those most opposed to 
them, join with Dissenters, in either taunting the Church 
with this defect, or mourning over it and hoping for reforma- 
tion? And how is it that some, who by reason of their 
immorality are more worthy of prisoners' fare in some place 
of civil correction, are compelled by their office to sit down 
at the table of the Lord? How is it that even now, great 
and blessed as the change has been, that some few even of 
the clergy, may be seen where once numbers were, at the 
ball-room, the card-table, the theatre, and such like places? 
It is difficult to make an answer to this which will be intelli- 
gible, much less acceptable. One must be well acquainted 
with the whole history of the civil and ecclesiastical courts 
and laws in England, in all their intermixtures one with the 
other, in order to understand and estimate the excuse derived 
therefrom. Doubtless much of that which is evil might 
have bsen prevented, as it has been within the last fifty 
years or more, by the faithful use of the other instruments 
which we have mentioned, and much of it may be ascribed 
to other causes; but making due allowance for other things, 
it must be admitted that very much of the want of discipline 
in the English Church is to be ascribed to the uncertainty, 
difficulty and expense of suits, in the courts to which clergy 



47 



are liable to be called for acts of discipline. An appeal from 
the decisions of Bishops and ministers against either clergy 
or laity, may at once be had by any one who is able and 
desirous to do it, and the costs are very great. This has 
ever been considered the greatest of all the grievances, to 
which, in the Church of England, faithful Bishops and 
clergy are liable. Let me mention two instances by way of 
proof and illustration. On my visit to England in '41, a 
minister of the highest standing in the Church mentioned 
the following cases: — There was in his Church a communi- 
cant of intemperate habits, who had for sometime been a 
reproach to it. He was anxious to remove that reproach, 
but knew that it was a case in which, if suspension took 
place, he would probably be summoned into the courts on a 
charge of slander, and that the trial must be tedious, vexa- 
tious and most expensive. He had neither time nor the 
means to spare. He was however resolved to do something, 
by which he might vindicate himself before a congregation 
which well knew that the individual was unworthy. After 
having no doubt used all private admonition in vain, on a 
certain occasion of administering the Lord's supper he 
passed him by. Perhaps on the spot the person demanded 
the reason for so doing, when the minister being prepared 
for it, pointed out to him the canon of which I have spoken, 
requiring every communicant to inform the minister of his 
wish so to do, before each administration of the rite. The 
man, conscious that the law was against him, was obliged 
to submit, and in that instance there was no danger to the 
minister from appeal to the courts. The same minister 
mentioned the following fact as occurring between his own 
Bishop and an intemperate clergyman of the Diocese. The 
Bishop fearing to degrade him, on account of the difficulty 
and expense of proof, and defence against slander, if sum- 
moned before the courts, determined nevertheless to do what 
he could in the way of private admonition, He accordingly 



48 



after advising him of an intended visit on a certain day, the 
object of which was easily understood by the offending 
minister, called on him, and in a short time opened the 
subject* The minister immediately rang the bell for his 
chief servant, asking the Bishop to wait a few moments. 
When the servant came, his master requested him to be 
seated, saying) that the Bishop was about to hold a conver- 
sation with him, to which he wished him — the servant — to 
listen. The Bishop at once perceived that his object was to 
have the servant be a witness in an action of slander, which 
he would bring into the courts, and therefore took up his hat 
and left the room. Not only has this liability to be sued for 
acts of discipline, prevented the exercise of it in our mother 
Church, but such has been the influence over some in our 
own land, that notwithstanding the severance between 
Church and State, spiritual and civil courts in this country, 
it has been pleaded in excuse for the neglect of discipline, 
that there was danger even here* 

Still, God has in many ways blessed our mother Church, 
not only in making her, what she has been called, the bul- 
wark of the Reformation, but ever since, by raising up a 
great multitude of faithful Bishops and other ministers to set 
forth and defend, by preaching and writing, the glorious 
truths of the gospel^ and of converting the souls of a great 
multitude of people, who by their lives have evinced the 
power of godliness. He has in a measure supplied the lack 
of discipline, and counteracted the evil effects of her eccle- 
siastical courts, by blessing other means the more abun- 
dantly. He made many things to work together for her 
good. The lamentations of her friends, the taunts of her 
enemies, the very secessions from her communion, the 
establishment of independent societies within the kingdom, 
the emulation produced thereby, all have been made to con- 
tribute something to her purity. Wesley and Whitfield and 
their followers, have done no little by stirring up an holy zeal 



49 



in their mother Church. The Spirit of God has raised up 
within the last sixty or seventy years, a host of pious minis- 
ters, who, by their zealous labors and sound doctrine, have 
almost redeemed her character, and removed the stigma cast 
upon her. The Newtons, Yenns, Elliotts, Simeons, Wil- 
sons, Gisbornes, Bickerstiths; the Wilberforces, Thorntons, 
Grants, Hannah Mores, and thousands like them, have pro- 
duced a most blessed reformation in the manners of her 
communicants; and even those who are now troubling the 
peace of the Church by their Romanizing doctrines, have 
been made to contribute something to the good cause; and 
we cherish not only a pleasing hope, but strong confidence, 
that all the trials through which she is passing, and all the 
changes which may take place in her outward condition, 
will be made subservient to her true prosperity, and bring 
her nearer to that perfect pattern of a Church, which we 
find in the days of the Apostles, when, though under perse- 
cution, it was under bondage to no earthly power, so as to 
submit itself for laws and discipline to the authority thereof. 

SEC. VIII. — DISCIPLINE OF OUR AMERICAN CHURCH. 

In what we have said of the English Church, we have 
anticipated much that we should say of her daughter in 
America, were we only engaged in exhibiting the dis- 
cipline of the latter. Her articles, her rubrics, her offices 
and her canons, so far as they bear on this subject, are 
substantially the same with those we have been consider- 
ing. The homilies remain unchanged. Some of the can- 
ons bear a striking resemblance. Most of the canons of 
the English Church were directed against the Non-con- 
formists. We of course have none such. Our rubrics^ 
canons, and addresses before the communion, have the 
three characteristics which we have shown to belong to 
the Church in the times of the Apostles, to the Primi- 
tive Church and to the English Church, 1st. By our 
7 



50 



articles on the sacraments, by our addresses before or at the 
communion, by our preaching from the pulpit, we state the 
qualifications for communing, and warn of the danger of 
unworthy receiving, instead of encouraging any to come 
with superstitious views of the ordinance.* 2ndly. By 
canons, rubrics, ordination services, and the whole tenor of 
our Prayer Book, we expect the ministers to do much in the 
way of private admonition, advice and warning. 3rdly. If 
these fail, either to correct what is evil, or to cause the un- 
worthy to forbear approaching the table, then as to those 
evil livers, some of whom are specified, who by their open 
and notorious transgressions, offend the congregation, they 
must not be suffered to come. They must, either for a spe- 
cified or indefinite period, be separated from their fellowship 
with the Church. It may not be amiss to state some of the 
language used on this subject. In the rubric before the ser- 
vice, the open and notorious evil liver is specified as one 
who must not be permitted to come; being one who does 
not merely fall into some open act of sin through infirmity, 
and repents at once of the same, but who practices the 
same, so as to offend the congregation and injure the cause 
of religion. The words open and notorious are opposed to 
secret sins, the making public of which might do more 
harm, than the discipline would do good. We have seen, 
that in primitive times the divulging of secret sins by the 

* As another proof that our Church opposes herself to that Romish view of the sacra- 
ments which supposes them to possess in themselves some inherent virtue, or magical 
power, by which they operate for good on the soul, if there be no great obstacle, and that 
she most carefully seeks to keep the unworthy from partaking of them, we may mention 
that she has offices for the visitation of the sick and dying, besides other prayers for them, 
yet in none of them does she bid the minister urge the sick or dying to partake of the 
Lord's supper. In cases where private communion is allowed, the sick person must •' be 
desirous of it," and must "send for" the minister for that very purpose; and even then, 
there must be at least two others besides the minister and sick person, except in times of 
contagious disease, when they cannot be gotten, in order to a communion. But if "for 
lack of company to receive with him " or other sufficient cause he does not then receive 
the supper, the minister must assure him that if he has true faith, and penitence, and 
love in his heart, he doth partake of Christ profitably to his soul's health, though he do 
not receive the sacrament with his mouth. 



51 



person himself before the congregation , did much evil, and 
was therefore abandoned. Open and notorious, therefore, 
are opposed to secret and unknown. It is also forbidden 
that any one who has done wrong to his neighbor, by word 
or deed (which of course must be open and notorious), 
must be forbidden to come untii he have made reparation, 
or is ready so to do. But more especially if he perceive 
malice and hatred to reign between two of them, he must 
not suffer them to partake while in this state. Both are 
supposed to have done some wrong in word or deed, and to 
have malice reigning in them. If either of them professes 
repentance, and readiness to make amends, he or she may 
be admitted, but not the one who refuses. The Church in 
every age, Jewish and Christian, has emphasized this point. 
The sin is that of murder in the sight of God. No such 
murderer has eternal life abiding in him. While this is the 
most obligatory of all ministerial acts of discipline, it is one 
requiring much discretion. The existence of such a state 
of feeling as malice or hatred, must be clearly perceived by 
the minister. Of course either words or deeds must exhibit 
it. It must also exist to such a degree as to reign in them. 
A hasty and injudicious attempt at reconciliation, with a 
threatening of repulsion from the table, whereby it would 
be made notorious, may do harm. The indispensable ne- 
cessity of Christian love in communicants, should be fre- 
quently and emphatically presented, in speaking and preach- 
ing of this feast of love, and then it will seldom happen that 
any who are conscious of such a settled feeling as that men- 
tioned in the rubric, will need to be repelled. A voluntary 
withdrawal will supersede that. There is also a ver}^ sol- 
emn passage in one of the addresses to be used on the Sun- 
day or holyday preceding the sacrament, in which it is said, 
te Therefore if any of you be a blasphemer of God, a hin- 
derer or slanderer of his word, an adulterer, or be in malice 
or envy, or any other grievous crime, repent ye of your sins, 



52 



or come not to that holy table." We should remember 
who are adulterers before God, and in how many ways we 
may be hinderers of his word, and may cause others to blas- 
pheme his holy name. Again, in our forty-second canon of 
the General Convention it is declared, that if any persons 
within this Church offend their brethren by any wickedness 
of life, such persons shall be repelled from the communion 
according to the rubric. The foregoing are the specifications 
of sins by name, as well as more general designations of evil 
living, which we find in our Prayer Book and the canons of 
the General Convention. It may perhaps be said, we do 
not see amongst them any express mention of those things 
which belong to the class of pleasurable sins, which are so 
often denounced in scripture, and made the subjects of dis- 
cipline in the primitive Church, as well as in some of later 
date. We shall state what the Church has done on that 
subject. First. Her canon in relation to candidates for 
orders, who are as yet but laymen, requires that the Bishop 
or Ecclesiastical Authority under whose care they are, 
te shall see that they do not indulge in any vain or trifling 
conduct, or in any amusements most liable to be abused to 
licentiousness, or unfavorable to that seriousness, and to 
those pious and studious habits which become those who are 
preparing for the holy ministry." As to those in the minis- 
try, according to the 37th canon, they are liable to be tried 
and punished, not only for gross immorality and violation of 
canons, but cc frequenting places most liable to be abused to 
licentiousness." As to what such amusements and such 
places are, though not specified by name, few would be at 
a loss to determine, they being some things now existing 
amongst us. And if ministers and candidates for orders are 
required to be examples to the people, it is in order that the 
people should follow them, even as St. Paul calls upon the 
Churches to follow him, as he followed Christ, and pro- 
posed not only himself but the other Apostles, as examples 



53 



to the brethren. Bat there is also something more special 
as to those things for the direction of the laity. Instead of 
issuing a book of sports for the afternoons of the Sabbath; 
she has a canon on the due observance of the Sabbath, in 
which she orders that the "Lord's day (not merely a part 
thereof) be spent in hearing the word of God read and 
taught, in private and public prayer, in other exercises of 
devotion, and in acts of charity, using all godly and sober 
conversation." Nor is this all. In the General Convention 
of 1817, it was proposed to pass a canon against certain 
places and amusements. Opposition, however, was made 
to it. It was especially urged that the rubric and canons 
were sufficient to justify the ministers in the exercise of dis- 
cipline in regard to them, and it was proposed and adopted 
as a substitute, that the House of Bishops be requested to 
express their opinion on the subjects embraced in the pro- 
posed canon. The following is an extract from their jour- 
nal, which was directed to be published on the journals of 
the other house also: — "The House of Bishops, solicitous 
for the preservation of the purity of the Church, and the 
piety of its members, are induced to impress upon the 
clergy the important duty, with a discreet but earnest zeal, 
of warning the people of their respective cures, of the dan- 
ger of an indulgence in those worldly pleasures which may 
tend to withdraw the affections from spiritual things. And 
especially on the subject of gaming, of amusements involv- 
ing cruelty to the brute creation, and of theatrical entertain- 
ments, to which some peculiar circumstances have called 
their attention, they do not hesitate to express their unani- 
mous opinion that these amusements, as well from their 
licentious tendency, as from the strong temptations to vice 
which they afford, ought not to be frequented." In their 
pastoral letter of that year they advert to the same subject, 
and say, "But we cannot forget that in a list of the classes 
of evil livers, there is introduced the description of persons 



54 



6 who are lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God,' nor 
in respect to the female professors of religion in particular, 
the admonition, that 'she who liveth in pleasure is dead 
while she liveth.'* " I know of nothing else worth noticing 
on this subject in the legislation of the General Convention. 
It has been a uniform principle with that body, to legislate 
as little as possible, lest she should awaken jealousy in the 
Diocesan Conventions. It was established immediately 
after the general union of all the then American States, and 
by some of the very persons who formed that union, who 
would not have consented to the ecclesiastical union except 
on the same great principles which regulated the relative 
powers of the general and State governments, which most 
carefully guarded the States against the encroachments of 
Congress. Whatever, therefore, is not in words, or by plain 
and necessary inference, surrendered up by the different 
Dioceses to the General Convention, is retained by them. 
In the canons of the General Convention we see this princi- 
ple recognized in various references and concessions to the 
Diocesan Conventions, and in those latter we find numerous 
instances of their action and legislation according to it. 
Sole and unrestricted legislation was never conceded to the 
General Convention. On the great points where it is al- 
lowed to legislate, the Diocesan Convention must not con- 
tradict its laws, but they may enlarge upon them and apply 
them as circumstances require, or legislate for themselves in 
the absence of general legislation. Wherefore we find that 
in different States the Conventions have passed laws touch- 
ing both clerical and lay discipline, candidates for orders, 
delegates to the Convention, etc., without violating any 
general canons. This will not be questioned by any one 
who will examine and compare together our general code 
and the codes of the different Dioceses. This provision and 
allowance rests the responsibility of wholesome discipline on 
each Diocese, as well as on the General Convention. It 



55 



would indeed be a great evil and defect, if no one Diocese 
should be allowed to go in advance of another in any im- 
provement, or of the movements of the General Convention 
in a practical matter of this kind, so important to the purity 
of the Church; more especially constituted as the General 
Convention now is, where each Diocese has an equal vote, 
though it is a fact that it takes some six or eight of the 
smallest to equal, in the number of ministers and communi- 
cants, one of the largest. Such a principle as this would 
bring our American Churches into the same sort of bondage 
to the General Convention, that the Dioceses of old came 
under to the Provincial Synods and Metropolitan Bishops, 
which at last ended in the supremacy of Rome. It was not 
so at the beginning, amongst the Apostolic Churches. It 
was not so in the English Church at an early period. At 
that time, each Bishop of a Diocese met twice a year with 
his Presbyters, summoning some of the laity to give infor- 
mation as to cases requiring discipline and attention. At 
these semi-annual meetings they not only enforced the laws 
made at the Provincial Synods, but passed others for the 
exercise of discipline. Our American Church had these 
precedents before her, as well as our civil union. See 
Burns' Ecclesiastical Law. 

On the subject of discipline in our American Church, I 
have only one remark to add. Happily freed as we are 
from bondage to the civil government, the clergy standing 
in no danger or just fear of vexatious and expensive law 
suits, for acts of discipline performed in accordance with 
God's word and the rules of our Church; at full liberty, 
and bound to use every instrument which God has appointed 
to make his Church a praise to him on earth, and to prepare 
it for appearing before him " without spot or wrinkle or any 
such thing;" if we presumptuously forego the right use of 
discipline, and rely too much on other means, such as God 
has in a measure blessed under peculiar circumstances to 



56 

the English Church, in her state of bondage; if we of our 
own accord, lay aside any part of that " whole armour of 
God" which he has provided and commanded us to use, 
how can we claim or expect the promised blessing? By so 
doing we shall have broken the word of God, put asunder 
what he hath joined, and must be held responsible for the 
consequences. 

CHURCH OP VIRGINIA. 

But as my address is to the ministers of the Diocese of 
Virginia, I may be permitted to say something more particu- 
larly as to what has occurred among us on this subject. At 
an early peiiod of my ministry, myself and a worthy lay 
member of the Church, who still lives to render it good 
service, were directed to address a letter to the two adjoining 
Dioceses, proposing a union for the purpose of establishing a 
Theological Seminary. The letter to a leading lay member 
of the one received no answer. That addressed to the 
Bishop of the other was answered in the following manner: 
That such was the prevalence of infidelity, and such the 
corruption of morals in Virginia, it would not be safe to 
trust an institution of this kind in her midst. Thus disap- 
pointed, we threw ourselves into the hands of God, and 
have found that it is better to fall into the hands of God 
than of man. As to the extent of the infidelity and corrupt- 
ion that prevailed, I shall not here speak. In a previous 
address to the Convention of Virginia, I made some state- 
ments on that painful subject. Suffice it to say, that at the 
very last of those Conventions which preceded their suspen- 
sion for some years (during which the existence of the 
Church was almost despaired of,) that is, in the year 1805, 
the Convention, after lamenting in a preamble the present 
state of the Episcopal Church, and the want of good laws, 
and the non-execution of those existing, passed a number of 
canons, calling on both clergy and laity to unite in observ- 



57 



ing them and promoting the prosperity of the Church. 
Amongst them was the following: u Be it ordained that any 
lay member of the Church being a communicant thereof, 
conducting himself in a manner unworthy of a Christian, 
may be, and ought to be, admonished by the minister and 
vestry of the parish and congregation; and if such member 
persevere in such conduct, he shall be suspended or expelled 
by the minister and vestry; in which case he may appeal to 
the Convention, which shall have power to confirm or reject 
the sentence." In the year 1816, when considering the 
best means of reviving the Church, the same preamble and 
canon were adopted, only the Ordinary instead of the Con- 
vention was made the court of appeal, and at a subsequent 
Convention, the minister alone, according to the rubric, and 
not the minister and vestry, was appointed to execute the 
discipline; but if it was desired by either the minister or 
the offending communicant, the Church Wardens, if com- 
municants, might be called on to aid in the examination of 
witnesses, etc. In pursuance of the same desire to purify 
the Church from old corruptions, and remove injurious 
reproaches still cast on her, in the year 1818, the following 
resolution was adopted in the Convention held in Winches- 
ter: " Whereas, differences of opinion prevail as to certain 
fashionable amusements, and it appears desirable to many 
that the sense of the Convention should be expressed con- 
cerning them; the Convention does hereby declare its opinion, 
that gaming, attending on theatres, public balls, and horse- 
racing, should be relinquished by all the members of this 
Church, as having the bad effects of staining the purity of 
the Christian character, of giving offence to their pious 
brethren, and of endangering their own salvation, by their 
rushing voluntarily into those temptations against which 
they implore the protection of their heavenly Father; and 
this Convention cherishes the hope, that this expression of 
its opinion will be sufficient to produce uniformity of opin- 
8 



58 



ion among all the members of our communion." Doubt- 
less some good effect resulted from this expression of 
opinion, but neither perfect unanimity of sentiment, nor 
uniformity of conduct, did take place. The opinion of the 
Standing Committee being asked by the Bishop as to the 
question, whether this resolution was designed to have the 
effect of law or canon; it was replied that a resolution could 
not of course have the force of law, but still left the decis- 
ion of such matters to the minister and vestry under the 
rubric which directs the exercise of discipline on open and 
notorious evil livers. The Committee, however, though 
disclaiming all right to expound the rubric, leaving that to 
each minister and vestry,* do not hesitate to condemn all 
these things mentioned in the resolution as altogether im- 
proper in communicants. The whole responsibility of 
deciding the applicability of general terms to practices about 
which there has been some dispute, for which the more 
worldly minded and pleasure-loving, in all ages, have 
pleaded, being cast on the ministers, they could only meas- 
ure the same by such scriptures as seem to condemn them, 
by the canons of the Church in different ages, and the 
general sentiment of the more pious concerning them. It 
has, therefore, appeared desirable in order to remove all 
doubt, and to prevent the charge of undue assumption of 
authority in doubtful cases, to follow the example of all 
civil and religious bodies, and render clear by canon, in as 
many instances as seemed to require it, what without canon 
might be thought to be doubtful, and therefore subject the 
minister to needless censure if exercising discipline, or else 
tempt him to the neglect thereof. For this reason, and 
because of a mortifying inciease in the number of profess- 
ing Christians in our own diocese, who have, to the injury 
of religion, yielded to the temptation of sinful pleasures, 

* This was a mistake in the committee. The vestry had Tbeen left out at the preceding 
Convention; the whole responsibility rested on the ministers. 



59 



notwitstanding the faithful preaching and affectionate admo- 
nition of their ministers, the warnings of the Bishops, and 
repeated remonstrances of the Convention, it has been pro- 
posed to forbid by canon some of those things not specified 
by name in the rubrics or canons of the General Conven- 
tion. At the revision of the laws, in the Convention at 
Norfolk, in the year 1S4S, the following canon was passed 
with great unanimity, no one indeed voting against it. though 
some few doubting its necessity or expediency. As its rati- 
fication must take place at another Convention, it was 
accordingly proposed with the rest of the revised code at 
the Convention of 1S49, but postponed until the Conven- 
tion of 1S50. # The canon is in these words: ''-'An}" mem- 
ber of the Church being a communicant thereof, conduct- 
ing himself or herself in a manner unworthy of a Christian, 
ought to be admonished, or repelled from the Lord's table 
by the minister of the parish or Church, according to the 
rubric j and gaming, attendance on horse racing, and theat- 
rical amusements, witnessing immodest and licentious exhi- 
bitions and shows, attending public balls, habitual neglect 
of public worship, or a denial of the doctrines of the gospel 
as o-enerallv set forth in the authorized standards of the 
Church, are offences for which discipline should be exer- 
cised. This, however, shall not be construed to include all 
the subjects of discipline in the Church." It will be per- 

* This canon was not only considered,, but a rote taken, -when it was found that forty- 
two of the clergy were in favor of it, and twelve against it, while twenty-two of the laity 
■were against it. and nineteen in favor of it. A number, nearly all. we are informed,, of 
those who voted against it declared, either publicly or privately, that their reason for so 
doing was, that they thought the rubrics and canons of the Church already sufficient to 
justify the minister in proceeding against offences such as those specified in the proposed 
canon, and that they ought so to do. As, however, they saw that their vote would proba- 
bly be misunderstood, and they be charged with advocating such things, some of them ex- 
pressed a wish for its re-consideration, that they might change their vote and leave no 
doubt of their entire opposition to all such practices. This, however, could not, with 
propriety, be done, as some of the members had left the Convention. It was thought 
sufficient to re-consider and postpone the final action until the next Convention, when, it 
is hoped, there will be little or no difference of opinion. 



60 



ceived that we have here a general expression as to conduct 
" unworthy of a Christian," then a specification of certain 
offences, but with a declaration that this does not include all 
unworthiness, to meet an objection raised, that what was 
omitted in the specification was thereby licensed. The 
things specified are nearly all of them of a peculiar class, 
and such as had once brought, or do now bring, reproach 
on the Church. Gaming and horse-racing are sinful amuse- 
ments, once to the shame of the Church practiced, and 
frequented by some of her clergy and laity, and though 
now abandoned by all her clergy, and it is to be hoped by 
all her laity, (though this was not the case at the time of 
the resolution at the Convention of 1832), it has been 
thought best to place them on the list of forbidden things, so 
that if the prohibition thereof be not necessary to prevent 
their return and to justify discipline, it may stand as the 
decision of the Church as a part of her history and a help to 
those who are to come. As to other places and amuse- 
ments which we think sinful, there is a general complaint of 
all denominations of Christians in our land of an increased 
need of adopting the most effectual means for rescuing their 
members from the snares there laid for them, and into which 
too many are disposed to rush. In thus acting, the Con- 
vention will be sustained by the opinions and practice of the 
best of God's people in every age, whether Jewish or 
Christian.* 

* As it is gratifying to perceive the evidences of genuine piety among the first Christians, 
notwithstanding doctrinal errors and practical corruptions growing out of their connect- 
ion with Jews and Gentiles, so is it pleasing to see the proofs that God always had enough 
of the faithful among his ancient people, the Jews, to exhibit the superior purity of their 
religion to that of the nations around. The Abbey Fleury, in his history of the Ancient 
Israelites, says, they had no profane shows among them; and as to games of chance, 
they were entirely ignorant of them, for we do not find the name of such things as the 
latter in scripture. As to hunting, though we read of nets and snares in scripture, yet he 
says there is no account of dogs being raised and kept for the chase as in modern days, 
guch hunting belonging to the vast forests and untilled lands of cold countries. The tes- 
timony of Josephus is also very satisfactory. In his history and defence of the Jewish 
nation, he justifies their avoidance of intercourse with foreigners, by the example of 



61 



SECTION IX.— CONCLUDING REMARKS. 

Having thus briefly surveyed the history of our subject as 
set forth in God's word, in the early Christian Church, in 
our mother Church, and in our own, we conclude with a 
few remarks by way of application. 

1st. Although we have quoted freely from the Fathers 
and Reformers, and made use of their testimonies and ex- 
ample in order to enforce our own views of what is right 
and expedient, and of course hold them in high esteem in 
many things, we by no means bind ourselves to a blind and 
implicit compliance with all, either of their opinions or prac- 
tices on the subject we are considering. With the word of 
God for our guide as to general principles, if, in humble de- 
pendence on divine direction, we faithfully endeavor to find 
out what is suited to our own age and country, and the 
altered circumstances of the Church, we may certainly hope 
to regulate this part of its discipline, so as to effect the great 
end in view.* 

the Athenians and Lacidemonians in their earlier and purer days, -when they feared the 
contamination of intimacy with older and more corrupt nations, and forbade much associa- 
tion -with them. Speaking of the manners of the heathen, he says : " Our law does not 
permit us to make festivals at the birth of our children, and thereby afford occasion of 
drinking to excess ; but it ordains that the very beginning of our education should be 
immediately directed to sobriety/' Again, "Our laws take care of righteousness, they 
banish idleness and expensive living, instruct men to be content with what they have, 
and be laborious in their callings; courageous in defending laws; inexorable in punishing 
malefactors." His account of the first introduction of heathenish amusements among 
them is quite affecting. Xo public exhibitions of the kind were ever known among them, 
until after the death of Alexander the Great, when some apostate Jews obtained leave of 
Antiochus to build as gymnasium at Jerusalem, as they "wished to follow the Grecian 
way of living.'' After that, the wicked Herod, abandoning the laws and customs of his 
fathers, built a theatre in the city, and a large amphitheatre in the plain, to exhibit such 
shows as Josephus says " had never been delivered down to them as fit to be used.*' He 
spared no pains and expense to make them as entertaining as possible, by getting per- 
formers from all parts of the world. "To native Jews," says Josephus, "this was no 
better than a dissolution of those customs for which they had so great a veneration.'* 
Most violent was the opposition made to the representations of the theatre, and Herod 
had need of all his skill to prevent some great outbreak of the people. As it was, his 
life was assailed by some, who died, declaring their readiness thus to suffer in defence of 
their ancient customs. 

* In one thing all Churches, all religions, all governments agree, and that is, in the 
propriety of a code cf la^s ae cpecific as circumctanceE require, neither leaving every man 



62 

2ndly. Although our attention has been mainly given to 
discipline in its bearing on the laity and on a certain class of 
offences^ we have not neglected to speak of canons touching 
the clergy and other kinds of sin, even those confessed by 
all to be worthy of discipline. As to these latter, if any 
minister, through cowardice or false tenderness, shall permit 
them to go unpunished, let him remember what St. Paul said 
and did concerning the guilty person at Corinth, and what 
may be expected from neglecting to punish notorious and 
great evil doers. As to the discipline of the clergy, let the 
laity remember that they unite with equal legislative powers 
in establishing it. The canons thus made subject all minis- 
ters and candidates for orders to punishment for the same 
offences which render laymen liable, only that the punish- 
ment is more severe, for where the laity are only deprived of 
communion, the clergy are deprived of orders. As to un- 
seemly diversions, and improper places and things most 
liable to be abused, they are most expressly interdicted to 
the clergy. The laity who unite in such prohibition, should 
surely include themselves in the same, and not even seem 
to advocate a different standard of religion for each order, as 
they hope to inhabit the same heaven. As to matters of 
doctrine (in regard to which the Church in times past has 
ever had chief reference to the clergy, sometimes indeed 
with an intolerant spirit, seeking to enforce a too exact uni- 
formity, and relying unduly on the arm of authority, and 
too little on argument and an appeal to God's word,) I trust 
that the American Church will be guided in the path of 
duty by the wisdom which is from above. As we allow 

to do what seems right in his own eyes, nor some man or men to rule arbitrarily accord- 
ing to their own judgment and will, neither relying on moral suasion and philosophy. 
Men will ever be disposed to make free use of the principle, "where there is no law, there 
,s no transgression," and interpret its silence into sanction and consent. Cicero's remark 
concerning the brief Roman code, is most just: — "I will boldly declare my opinion, 
though the whole world be offended at it. I prefer this little book of the twelve tables 
alone, to all the volumes of the philosophers. I find it to be of more weight and much 
more useful." — De Oratore. 



63 



those of the laity whose hearts fail them as to their religious 
profession , or who may prefer some other communion, to 
withdraw themselves without any public and disgraceful 
anathema, so is a door open for the withdrawal of ministers, 
who may find that they have mistaken their calling, or pre- 
fer some other ministry or communion. We should be sorry 
to see either of these doors closed, since we regard them as 
wise and charitable provisions, though liable to be abused. 
But while we would kindly open them for the conscientious, 
we would not throw them wide open, and keep them ever 
so for those, whether clergy or laity, who might choose to 
remain during their own pleasure, doing mischief by teach- 
ing and example, until they can do no more, and then find 
it convenient to escape.* 

Brdly. It may be and has been often said, is not the 
Church exceeding the limits of that authority which was 
given her by the Divine Head in prescribing such terms of 
communion, or giving such power to her ministers, as some 

* The folio-wing facts in relation to General Washington are mentioned, in order to en- 
force the view we hare taken of the duty of one who feels that he has either with insuffi- 
cient views united with Christians in the Lord's supper, or else has afterwards "been drawn 
away by too much intercourse with the world, from that seriousness and religious 
sensibility required for a worthy participation. There is good reason to believe, that Gen- 
eral Washington was in early life not only an active vestryman of the Church, but a 
communicant — that he did commune and give other evidences of a religious character 
during the war, but I state it on the authority of Bishop White, that while living in 
Philadelphia as President of the United States, he did not commune, but withdrew with 
the rest of the congregation. After some time, however, he abstained from Church on 
communion days, though punctual on all other days, which the Bishop abscribed to a 
remark of one of the ministers in a sermon, as to the evil example of turning our backs 
on the table of the Lord. He supposed that General Washington thought it would seem 
more respectful in him, and be less injurious in the way of example to others not to come, 
than to leave the house in that manner. It may be that the many engagements of pub- 
lic life, and all the worldly scenes through which he passed, had engrossed his mind, and 
shut out much of that interest in religion which had once dwelt within his breast, and 
that he conscientiously withdrew. Although it is much to be lamented that the States- 
man did not wait as humbly and faithfully on God as did the General, yet his conduct 
was far better than that of many in high places who have continued their religious pro- 
fession, while their conversation and conduct were at utter variance with its require- 
ments. Whether Washington returned to that full profession after his retirement to 
private life, I am unable to say. He certainly was an attendant at Church — a vestryman 
of it — and a liberal contributor to the same. 



64 



would advocate? Does she not demand more than the 
great Master himself would do in order to a seat at his table? 
If any one is conscious of faith in Christ and repentance 
towards God, and professes the same, and asks for the com- 
munion, who shall refuse him, seeing that such are declared 
to be the great conditions of salvation. To this we reply, 
that if a communicant of the Church has a right to demand 
continuance in it and exemption from discipline, because 
professing to have the principles of faith and penitence 
within him, though violating some of her rules, then has a 
candidate for adult baptism, confirmation and the first par- 
ticipation of the supper, a right to demand the same, and 
refuse to comply with any other terms, saying that Christ 
and the Apostles demanded no others. What then is to be 
done in the case of one thus demanding baptism? The 
Church has commanded the minister not only to be careful 
in the previous examination, that the person come worthily, 
but has prescribed a service in which it is required of the 
candidate, not merely to say that he has faith and repent- 
ance in his heart, but that he renounces the devil and all his 
works, the pomps and vanities of this wicked world, and all 
the sinful lusts of the flesh, and believes all the articles of 
the Christian faith, and will keep all of God's command- 
ments; which expressions comprehend many things, accord- 
ing to general consent, which some do not think are neces- 
sarily included in the terms faith and repentance. Must the 
minister change the service and baptize him on the general 
profession of faith and repentance? No one will maintain 
this. This penitent believer then must be refused by the 
Church, because he will not submit to other terms than 
God imposes, that is, according to the reasoning of some. 
Let us, however, be sure that we do not mistake as to the 
terms which God auctually imposes. God does not merely 
use the general terms, believe and repent, in setting forth 
the terms of admission to his Church on earth or in heaven, 



65 



but enlarges on them, and explains them by various other 
scriptures, stating what things must be renounced in order 
to a true repentance, what things must be done in order to 
shew our faith; requires us to bring forth the fruits of faith 
and repentance. What are all the scriptures of the Old and 
New Testaments, but enlargements and explanations of the 
moral law and of faith and repentance? So it is with the 
Church in her baptismal vows, rubrics and canons. In all 
of these she sets forth her views of repentance, faith and 
obedience, and those who would come to her communion, 
must comply with the same. Otherwise, if every one is to 
be his own judge, nothing but confusion would ensue. 
The more conscientious and pious, if drawn into some sin 
and not justifying it, might be punished, while the more 
unscrupulous and irreligious, by declaring that they did not 
admit the same to be sin, or contrary to their professed faith 
or repentance, might be allowed to live as they pleased. 
The Church ought indeed to see that she does not go be- 
yond scripture in her demands, but be conformed either to 
the letter or the spirit thereof. We have already seen how 
many scriptures speak of and condemn such things as are 
evidently alluded to in the baptismal renunciation. 

4thly. It may now perhaps be asked in relation to many 
things denounced with more or less precision in scripture, 
and by the early Church, as sinful, is not the world with 
which we have to do, so changed and improved by the in- 
fluence of our holy religion, that such things either do not 
exist, or are so modified in their character, though still called 
by the same or similar names, as to have lost so much of 
evil or imbibed so much of good, that they no longer de- 
serve to be anathematized, and of course that discipline in 
relation to them is no more needed ? This is an important 
point, on the settlement of which very much of practical 
religion depends. We have seen that though Christianity 
effected much good in the first ages, sustained as it was by 
9 



66 



the mighty power of God and the purifying influence of 
persecution, yet there was much corruption in many of its 
professors, requiring discipline. The tones of piety and the 
manners of Christians varied very much, at different times 
and in different places, according to Ecclesiastical History, 
beginning with the accounts of the seven Churches in the 
Apocalypse, sometimes calling for commendation, at others 
for rebuke. The question is as to its condition in our times. 
We should be sorry to think with some, that we live in the 
most degenerate days. We believe that in many respects 
Christianity is now in a better condition, in the larger part 
of Protestant Christendom, than at any previous period. 
We rejoice to think that many things have either passed 
away, or been greatly changed for the better, which in dif- 
ferent ages dishonored mankind and the Christian Church; 
and yet there may be so much evil left, that godly discipline 
is required to be faithfully exercised. Let it be remembered 
by us, that substantially the same baptismal forms of re- 
nouncing the devil and all his works, the pomps and vani- 
ties of the world, and sinful lusts of the flesh, have come 
down to us from the early ages; nor has it at any time been 
proposed to alter them, they always seeming to be suitable 
and needed, there being many things among Christians, 
even to this day, answering to those renounced at the bap- 
tism of the first Christians. What, though some things from 
time to time passed away, or changed names, or lost some- 
thing of their grossness, others of the same kind took their 
place, though more refined, so that the evil and temptation 
were substantially the same; and the very arguments used 
against them by the better sort of Pagans and the Fathers, 
have been reiterated in every age by the pious and sober 
minded. Who is there that would dare to propose a change 
in the baptismal vows, or to put his name to an exposition 
of them, departing from those which have been set forth in 
every age; and yet how strange, how unmeaning and per- 



67 



verted would be an exposition accommodating the same to 
the wishes, opinions and practices of many professing Chris- 
tians in regard to themselves and children. Some parents 
there are too honest to go through a form which is in direct 
contradiction to their own lives, and to the manner in which 
they propose to bring up their children, and therefore prefer 
to leave them unbaptized, rather than offer them to God 
with a lie on their lips.* But there are those who, either 
from perfect indifference or from false views of religion, do 
not understand it aright, and do not make the answer of a 
good conscience towards God in those words. We are dis- 
puting much and earnestly, and not without cause, as to the 
meaning of other parts of the baptismal service, but let us be 
on our guard, lest while disputing about the doctrine of the 
baptismal regeneration of our infants (a thing necessarily 
hidden from our view and which God has not revealed), we 
permit the devil to put his interpretation on a far more im- 
portant part of the service, if St. Peter is to be believed, 
who says, that the baptism which saves, is a the answer of a 
good conscience towards God." But there is something 
else of far higher authority than the baptismal renunciation 

* Dr. Thomas Brey, in his exposition of our Church Catechism, says : " That which ap- 
proaches nearest in these, our days, to those sort of heathenish pomps, and which in 
pompousness and magnificence of scene, are not much inferior to them, are their profane 
and lewd plays acted in our public play-houses, where, for ought I know, more souls are 
murdered than in the former were bodies ; more profaneness, and more lewd assignations 
made than at the pagan theatres ; and how infinitely unfit it is, that those kinds of diver- 
sions should he permitted in a Christian State, or that persons, professing Christianity, 
should be permitted to go near them. 

" It can be demonstrated that the stage can never cease to be a school of vice ; for were 
nothing exhibited thereon that is congenial to the corrupt inclinations of the depraved 
heart of man, it would attract no spectator and could not be supported. If an attendance 
on the amusements of the theatre be not an implicit and positive breach of the baptismal 
covenant, it will be difficult to prove that it can be broken at all." 

Dr. Brey who thus speaks, was, Mr. Biddulph informs us, neither a Puritan nor a 
Methodist, but a staunch member of the Church of England. 

Bishop White, in his lectures on the Church Catechism, says : "That after the stage was 
purged of idolatry by Christian Emperors, still lewdness continued, and therefore the 
baptismal vow was continued ; and that even if that had been banished from the stage, 
there would have been always some things of the kind in the world to require such a vow 
and promise." 



68 



which has come down to us unchanged, and will continue 
to the end of the world the very same in letter and in spirit. 
The warnings of God's word, against the devil, the world 
and the flesh, against evil communication, against the se- 
ductions of pleasure, are for us as for the first disciples. If 
not, if they were only designed for the first disciples, and to 
warn them against existing evils which have now passed 
away, how large a portion of scripture would be to us a dead 
letter, of no practical use whatever. But let us remember 
that as we must not add to, we must not take from, that holy 
volume. That the same scriptures and the same baptismal 
vows are suitable for men in every age, is readily accounted 
for. Human nature is the same in every age, and is born 
into the same world of sin and temptation. In its unsancti- 
fied state, it delights in the indulgence of the same lusts, 
which call for the same gratifications. Even in its sancti- 
fied state, there is a remainder of sin ever ready to return to 
such things. The devil is the same unchanged being that 
he was at the first ; still bent upon the injury of our race, as 
when he tempted our first parents to gratify appetite, curios- 
ity and ambition, saying, "ye shall not surely die, but shall 
be as gods." His children are the same now as ever, sons 
of Belial and daughters of pleasure, tempting even the sons 
of God. He uses fullness of bread and abundance of idle- 
ness as means of corruption still, and destroys as many souls 
as ever in the snares of pleasure. The children of God 
have the same conflict as ever, and the kingdom of heaven 
still sufTereth violence, and cannot be taken but by force. 
The Canaanites are still in the land. The heathen in heart 
are still all around us, and we must come out from among 
them, as we hope to be the sons and daughters of God. 
The same heaven is to be won; the same hell to be escaped. 
If from these general remarks we descend to particulars, we 
shall find a closer resemblance than some might imagine be- 
tween the pleasurable vices of the former and latter days, as 



69 



well as all other sins. Games of chance, for instance, are 
the same absorbing, time wasting and soul destroying things 
now that they were in the first days of the Church, and 
among the heathen. If gladiatorial combats were discon- 
tinued, other combats took their place, in different parts of 
Christendom, and have not been actually abandoned to this 
day. If the shows of wild beasts and their deadly combats 
with each other and with men passed away, combats be- 
tween domestic animals have been carried on to the destruc- 
tion of thousands, and have been attended in many parts of 
Christendom by thousands of baptized Christians, sometimes 
even on the Sabbath. As to the theatre, are not sentiments 
continually there uttered, and in the most imposing manner, 
just as contrary to our religion and offensive to God, and 
pernicious to morals, as any idolatrous ones in those of old? 
Is there not indelicacy and lewdness in the dress and action 
of performers now as of old, and are not actors and actresses 
excluded now as of old, not only from the communion, but 
from respectable society? Are not the theatres the very places 
where the most abandoned of the female sex come to use 
all their arts for the seduction of the other, and where thou- 
sands of the other sex rush into the snare? Is it not shock- 
ing to think that our sisters and daughters are sitting beneath 
the same roof with these wretched beings, delighted with 
the same exhibition, applauding the same false sentiments, 
and even amused at the same indecent and licentious jests, 
or gestures, from persons perhaps of the same character? 
And as to dancing, can there have been anything in ancient 
times more immodest than the half-dressed female perform- 
ers on the stage, who attract so many to behold the shame- 
ful exposure of their persons, while engaged in an unnatural 
use of their limbs? Would any persons in such a garb be 
admitted into respectable houses? Would not the very boys 
follow and hiss at such along the streets, if any attempted to 
walk them in such an undress? But is this all? Do not 



70 



some who go to admire such actresses, return to imitate 
them, so far as will be tolerated? Is it not a matter of com- 
plaint, regret and shame, not merely with pious Christians, 
but with many of the purer minded of this world, that 
dances are introduced utterly inconsistent with that shame- 
facedness and modesty which the Apostle recommends ; in 
which there is an indelicate familiarity between the sexes 
which would not be allowed on other occasions? Again, is 
it asked whether there be anything in modern times which 
may be compared with the pictures of ancient days. We 
ask if there has not been a growing disposition to exhibit in 
a condition altogether different from that in which God him- 
self put our first parents, when with his own hands he made 
them garments for a covering, the pictures and statues of 
human beings, to be objects of admiration to the youth of 
both sexes, sometimes standing side by side, and even arm 
in arm? Nay, more, have there not been for the last few 
years, naked human beings, selected for their fine forms, 
carried about to be exhibited in every varied attitude, and 
though the corporations of some cities, to their praise, closed 
their gates against them, others gave them full liberty for 
display, to the thousands who flocked to the shameful spec- 
tacle.* 

It must be acknowledged that the public mind and taste are 
becoming more and more familiarized with such things. 
Indecent gestures, and smutty inuendoes and libertine senti- 
ments in the theatre, receive nothing but a mild rebuke 

* In another instance, also, may we trace a resemblance between modern and ancient 
times. The Apostle Paul, in his 1st Epistle to Timothy, enjoins it on "women professing 
godliness " " to adorn themselves with modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety, 
not with broidered hair, etc." Some of the early canons also forbid certain decorations of 
the person, " whereby to ensnare the beholders." It has ever been supposed that the 
attire of female performers at the theatres and other places was here alluded to, and that 
Christians were forbidden to imitate their unbecoming fashions. And is it not a fact, undis- 
puted, that the theatres of Paris and London have, at some times, had no little to do with 
setting the fashions for the ladies of Europe and America, and that some of their fashions 
have been wanting in shamefacedness, sobriety and modesty, as enjoined by the Apostle ? 



71 



from the gentlemen as being contrary to good taste, and are 
resented by the ladies, only by the uplifted fan or handker- 
chief. All kinds of exhibitions, indeed, which are transport- 
ed from place to place, must now have something to gratify 
the corrupt tastes of the people, in order to ensure their sup- 
port.* It should have great weight in determining the 
judgment and regulating the conduct of Christians as to all 
such things, to know that in all ages there have been num- 
bers not enrolling themselves with communicants, and some 
even doubting the truth of our holy religion, who, on prin- 
ciples of mere morality, have condemned them. What a 
testimony does the Emperor Julian furnish ! Wishing to 
adopt the most effectual means for supplanting Christianity 
and establishing Paganism, he presented the ministers and 
members of the Christian Church as models to his priests 
and people, positively forbidding the former to have any 
thing to do with the public amusements of that day, and 
saying that it was by the holy lives of Christians and their 
abstaining from such things, that their religion had made 
such progress, and that Paganism could only regain what it 
had lost in the same way. This of itself proves that, 
though many professing Christians had been false to their 
profession, many had been faithful to it; enough to force 
this commendation from an enemy. Let me also, in this 
connection, refer you to a memorable document to be found 
on the records of the American Congress, in those times 
which tried the souls of men, and when the heroes of the 
Revolution looked up to an Almighty arm for aid in that 
fearful contest of our country with the greatest nation upon 
earth. Remembering that we must renounce all things 
offensive to heaven, if we hope to secure its favor, they 

* A young member of the Church not long since informed me, that he was induced, for 
the first time, to attend a circus, being led thither by the example of other professors, and 
among the first things he heard was blasphemy from the clown, who came forth calling 
himself " The great I am." 



call upon all the States to take the most effectual measures 
for the encouragement of religion and good morals, and 
particularly specify " suppressing of theatrical entertain- 
ments, horse-racing, gaming, and such other diversions as 
are productive of idleness, dissipation and a general de- 
pravity of manners ." This testimony should have the 
greatest weight with us, because it has been ascertained 
that some of those who voted for it were not members of 
any denomination of Christians, and it appears that it was 
carried by a vote of nearly three-fourths of those present. 

ADDRESS TO THE LAITY. 

And now having adduced many facts and arguments on 
the subject of Ecclesiastical Law and Discipline, I draw to 
a close by a few solemn and affectionate words to our dear 
friends of the laity, urging them to such a course of conduct 
as may entirely supersede the exercise of it even in its first 
and mildest form of admonition. 

1st. To those of you who are more disposed to stretch 
your Christian liberty to the utmost bounds, who, from a 
love of pleasure, are disposed to indulge yourselves in things 
which you wish to consider lawful, because not positively 
by name forbidden, let me say, examine faithfully not only 
into your desires, motives, objects, &c, in seeking their 
gratification, but into the effects of the same. In the con- 
test between the old and the new man within you (if indeed 
there be such a contest), on which side do these things 
fight? Is the law of sin in your members, or the law of 
holiness in your souls strengthened thereby? Are you 
living to the flesh or to the spirit, knowing that to be carnal- 
ly minded is death, to be spiritually minded, life and peace? 
Thus living, can you say, u The life I now live, I live by 
faith in the Son of God?" Knowing that cc whatsoever is 
not of faith is sin." "Are you doing all these things 
heartily as to the Lord?" Are you not hindered in run- 



73 



ning the race before you by such things, and can you be 
hindered yourselves without being hinderers of others also? 
Be faithful to yourselves in this examination, and remember 
how much better it is to err on the one side than on the 
other — to relinquish lawful things rather than run the lisk 
of doing unlawful ones. The exercise of self-denial is 
called for in regard to lawful as well as unlawful things, 
when good can be done and evil prevented. St. Paul was 
thoroughly persuaded that certain things were lawful, and 
would not surrender his judgment as to them to any one, 
and yet as to practice, he would not eat meat or drink wine 
while the world lasted, if thus he should offend or tempt 
even a weaker brother. After his example it is our duty to 
avoid not only evil, but the appearance of it, having respect 
to things which "are of good report" among those who are 
without as well of those within.* 

2dly. To those of you who feel no disposition, and are 
under no temptation to forbidden indulgences, let me speak 
a word, asking your co-operation with God's ministers in 
this duty. By a consistent and decided course, you may do 
much towards strengthening their hands, and encouraging 
the more irresolute and less faithful of professors to walk 
uprightly. It is not enough that you abstain yourselves 
from evil or doubtful things, you must not suffer sin in a 
brother if you can help it. A cowardly silence or doubtful 
condemnation, a ready acquiescence or countenance afforded 

* Archbishop Leighton, in his admirable Commentary on the first Epistle of Peter, 
■when he comes to the 2d and 3d verses, about renouncing our lusts, revellings, banquet- 
ings, &c, and henceforth living to the -will of God and rejoicing in that, he says: "Half 
reformations in a Christian turn to his prejudice. It is only best to be reformed thrcragh- 
out, and to give up with all idols ; not to live one-half to himself and to the world, and as 
it were another half to God, for that is hut falsely so, and in reality cannot be. The only 
way is, to make a heap of all, to have all sacrificed together, and live to no lust, but alto- 
gether and only to God. Thus it must be ; there is no monster in the new creation — no 
half new creature — either all, or not at all. God will have nothing, unless he have the 
heart, and none of that neither, unless be have all. Royalty can admit of no rivalry. 
And if he be thy husband, thou must renounce all others. The title of a husband is as 
Btrict and tender as tbat of a king." 

10 



74 



by your presence, or in any other way, will weaken the 
hands of your ministers and encourage the lukewarm, the 
worldly minded and the timorous, to live so as to bring re- 
proach on their profession. Not only this, but you must be 
examples to them of active zeal in all good works. To 
abstain from evil is only a part of religion. We must 
cease to do evil and learn to do well. We must not only 
carefully avoid all evil communication with the world, in 
these ungodly amusements and works, but have fellowship 
with the saints in all those good works which God hath 
prepared for them to walk in, and which make them his 
u peculiar people." 

3rdly. One word to Parents. I have more than once 
already said, that you were the divinely appointed aids to 
ministers in this duty. If you be faithful in preparing your 
children for confirmation, according to the word of God and 
the baptismal vows, and do not wish or consent that they 
shall be presented to the Bishop until they have experienced 
a death unto sin and a new birth unto righteousness, until 
the love of God has displaced the love of the world in their 
hearts, the ministers will seldom have trouble afterwards. 
But it is often otherwise with parents. On conversing with 
a young candidate for confirmation once, in the presence of 
her mother, the latter told me she had only one fault to find 
with her daughter, viz: that she could not persuade her to 
go enough into the world, to enjoy herself with other young 
people. I was also once seriously asked by a mother, who 
seemed to have some earnest desires for her children's wel- 
fare in both worlds, if I would not prepare a sermon, defin- 
ing as accurately as possible the boundaries between the 
world and religion. She asked it particularly in reference 
to her children. She wished them to inherit the kingdom 
of heaven when they died, but would not have them to lose 
anything of this world's pleasure while here, which with 
any tolerable safety could be enjoyed. She evidently wished 



75 

to take them as near the very edge of the precipice as she 
could, without great danger of their being precipitated into 
the gulf below. Such a case as that, of course I could not 
undertake. Rather let me urge all parents who may read 
these pages, as they love their children, to remember that 
God is a jealous God, and will not dwell in a divided heart. 
Let them rather seek and covet of the Lord for their child- 
ren, the largest foretaste of heaven, and thus make them less 
anxious for the vanities of earth, whether they be riches, 
honors, or pleasures. 

And now, dear brethren and friends, one and all, think 
not that I am disposed to undue severity, or that I would do 
you the wrong of holding you up as great transgressors in 
the matters referred to. God is my witness, that I love you 
too much for this. I have served you too long/ known you 
too well, am too proud of you in many things, and even 
boast of you too much, to do you any injustice. I have 
ever said, that as a body you would fall behind none other 
in our own or other Churches, for intelligent and consistent 
piety, for kindness and hospitality, for liberality and zeal. 
Nay, in my inward rejoicings I have sometimes gone beyond 
this. So much personal kindness do I receive, and so much 
happiness do I enjoy, notwithstanding much bodily infirm- 
ity, in my protracted visitations, that I feel as though I 
should be tempted to continue them after they shall have 
ceased to be profitable, if that be not so already. This, my 
affection for you and delight in you, is the reason why I am 
jealous over you with such a godly jealousy. I know what 
has ever been the besetting sin of the members of our own 
and mother Church, and wish to guard you against it. 
Great has been the reformation of both from former times, 
but there is a present tendency to return to the same. Com- 
paratively few as yet have erred in the ways referred to, but 
it is an increasing number, and circumstances favor a yet 
greater increase, unless some check be imposed. If any 



76 



say, the number of transgressors is not great enough to re- 
quire more rigorous action, we reply, that in the primitive 
Church it was always considered and urged as a reason for 
pressing discipline, that but few transgressed, for if it was 
then neglected, it would soon be impracticable, and nothing 
would be heard but fruitless lamentations, and unheeded 
warnings. The history of the early Churches bears abun- 
dant testimony to this. St. Paul did not wait for members 
to sin greatly, but exercised godly discipline as soon as it 
was needed, that others might fear to offend. Still it may 
seem to some of you that I am weak, that it becomes not 
the dignity of the Episcopal Office to be dwelling on such 
things. The Episcopal Office may be comparatively useless 
b}^ reason of, and the Church itself die of such dignity. At 
any rate, permit us to say with the Apostle, u For we are 
glad when we are weak, and ye are strong, but this also we 
wish, even your perfection ." We are willing to be one of 
the weak things and foolish things, if God will only use us 
for some good purpose in your behalf. Nay, we ought not 
only to be willing, but rejoice to be weak and foolish with 
Solomon, and the Prophets, and Apostles, and Fathers, and 
Reformers, who ever warned men against despising what 
seemed to some of the wise and mighty of this world, as 
little things, but which they knew were by little and little 
sinking immortal souls down into the gulf of perdition. We 
wish to leave behind us our full testimony as to the evil ten- 
dency of those things, whose character and effects we have 
now been witnessing during a ministry of nearly forty years. 
When dead, or our voice can be heard no more among you, 
we wish to speak by this record. Such is our interest in 
your welfare, that we feel as if death itself shall not alto- 
gether sunder the tie that binds us together, but that we may 
still continue to care for you, and perhaps have some know- 
ledge of your affairs. 

And to you, my dear brethren of the clergy, who I well 



77 



know deeply sympathize in all that I have said, who often 
ask for counsel and help in these things from your Bishops, 
if I shall have furnished you the least light and strength in 
the path of duty by what I have written, I shall be amply 
repaid for all the time, thought, study and prayer which I 
have bestowed upon it. I commend it and you, and your 
dear people, to Him who alone is able to give it any power, 
or you any success, or to present them faultless and with- 
out reproach to himself in the great day. 
Yours in the Lord. 

W. MEADE. 



DR. JOHNSON'S OPINION 

OF BISHOP COLLIER, THE AUTHOR OF THE BOOK FROM WHICH THE FOL- 
. LOWING EXTRACTS ARE TAKEN. 



"Being a fierce and implacable non-juror, he knew that an attack on the theatre would 
never make him suspected for a Puritan; he therefore published a short view of the im- 
morality and profaneness of the English stage, I believe, with no other motive than reli- 
gious zeal and honest indignation. His onset was violent. Those passages which, while 
they stood single, had passed with little notice, when they were accumulated and exposed 
together, excited horror. The wise and the pious caught the alarm, and the nation won- 
dered why it had suffered irreligion and licentiousness to be openly taught at the public 
charge."— Life of Congreve. 



APPENDIX. 



EXTRACTS FROM THE CELEBRATED WORK OF JEREMY COLLIER; ON THE 
ENGLISH STAGE, PUBLISHED IN THE YEAR 1698. 

The following testimonies are well calculated to enforce what has been 
previously said on theatrical representations. I ask a careful reading and 
candid estimate of them. In the first part of the woik, the Author ex- 
amines the English plays very critically, and exposes the false sentiments, 
improper language, and vicious characters set forth in them, comparing 
them with the celebrated plays of Greece and Rome, and showing how, 
in many things, the latter were better friends of virtue and religion. In 
the sixth and last chapter, from whence the following extracts are taken, 
he gives you the opinion of the best of the heathen concerning the stage, 
as it existed among them, the sense of the primitive Church on the stage 
as it then was, and some testimonies as to the English stage. From 
these extracts three things will plainly appear : — 1st. Thai the same 
reigning errois belong to the stage in all ages ; that it can only be sus- 
tained by humoring certain follies, exciting certain passions, and minis- 
tering to certain corrupt propensities of our nature. 2ndly. That some 
professing christians wished to frequent theatres and public shows in 
those days, as well as now, and used the same arguments in favor of the 
indulgence. 3rdly. That faithful ministers opposed them by the same 
arguments now used, and the pious of those days abstained from them 
for the same reasons which influence such as condemn and avoid them 
now. 

The sixth and last chapter thus begins : — Having in the foregoing 
Chapters discovered some part of the Disorders of the English stage; I 
shall in this last, present the reader with a short view of the sense of 
antiquity, to which I shall add some modern authorities ; from all which 
it will appear, that plays have generally been looked on as the nurseries 
of vice, the corrupters of truth, and the grievance of the country where 
they are suffered. 

This proof from testimony shall be ranged under these three heads: — 

Under the first, I shall cite some of the most celebrated heathen Phil- 
osophers, Orators and Historians, men of the biggest consideration, for 
sense, learning and figure. 

The Second shall consist of the laws and constitutions of Princes, &c. 

The Third will be drawn from church records, from Fathers, and 
councils of unexceptionable authoiity. 

DIVISION 1st. 

1st. I shall produce some of the most celebrated Heathen Philoso- 
phers. To begin with Plato. This Philosopher tells us " that plays 
raise the passions, and pervert the use of them, and by consequence are 



80 



dangerous to morality. For this reason, he banishes these diversions 
his commonwealth." 

Xenophon, who was both a man of letters and a great general, com- 
mends the Persians for the discipline of their education. 'They won't 
(says he) so much as suffer their youth to hear anything that's amorous 
or tawdry.' They were afraid, want of ballast might make them mis- 
carry, and that 'twas dangerous to add weight to the bias of nature. 

Aristotle lays it down for a rule, ' that the law ought to forbid young 
people the seeing comedies. Such permissions not being safe, till age 
and discipline had confirmed them in sobriety, fortified their virtue, and 
made them as it were proof against debauchery.' This Philosopher, 
who had looked as far into human nature as any man, observes farther : 
' That the force of music and action is very affecting. It commands the 
audience and changes the passions to a resemblance of the matter before 
them. So that where the representation is foul, the thoughts of the 
company must suffer.' 

Tully cries out upon ' licentious plays and poems, as the bane of so- 
briety and wise thinking. That comedy subsists upon lewdness, and 
that pleasure is the Root of all evil.' 

Livy reports the oiiginal of plays among the Romans. ' He tells us 
they were brought in upon the score of religion, to pacify the Gods, and 
remove a mortality. But then he adds that the motives are sometimes 
good, when the means ate stark naught. That the remedy in this case 
was worse than the disease, and the atonement more infectious than the 
plague. 

Valerius Maximus, contemporary with Livy, gives much the same ac- 
count of the rise of Theatres at Rome. 'Twas devotion which built 
them. And as for the performances of those places, which Mr. Dryden 
calls the ornaments, this author censures, as the Blemishes of peace. 
And which is more, He affirms, ' They were the occasions of civil dis- 
tractions ; And that the State first blushed, and then bled for the enter- 
tainment. He concludes the consequences of plays to be intolerable. 
And that Massilienses did well in clearing the country of them. Seneca 
complains heartily of the extravagance and debauchery of the age; And 
how forward people were to improve in that which was naught. That 
scarce any one would apply themselves to the study of nature and moral- 
ity, unless when the Play-House was shut, or the weather foul. That 
there was no body to teach Philosophy, because there was no body to 
learn it. But that the Stage had nurseries, and company enough. This 
misapplication of time and fancy, made knowledge in so low a condition. 
This was the cause the hints of antiquity were no better pursued, that 
some inventions were sunk, and that human reason grew downwards, 
rather than otherwise. And elsewhere he avers, that there is nothing 
more destructive to good manners than to run idling to see sights. For 
there vice makes an insensible approach, and steals upon us in the dis- 
guise of pleasure.' 

Tacitus, relating how Nero hired decayed gentlemen for the Stage, 
complains of the mismanagement, and lets us know 'twas the part of a 
Prince to relieve their necessity, and not to tempt it. And that his 
bounty should rather have set them above an ill practice, than driven 
them upon it. 



SI 



And in another place, he informs us that 4 the German women were 
guaided against danger, and kept their honour out of. harm's way, by 
having no Play Houses among them. 5 

Plays, in the opinion of the judicious Plutarch, are dangerous to cor- 
rupt young people, and therefore Stage Poetry, when it grows too 
hardy and licentious, ought to be checked. This was the opinion of 
these celebrated authors with respect to Theatres. They charge them 
with the corruption of principles and manners, and lay in all imaginable 
caution against them. And yet these men had seldom anything but this 
world in their scheme, and formed their judgments only upon natural 
light and common experience. We see then to what sort of conduct we 
are obliged. The case is plain, unless we are little enough to renounce 
our Reason, aad fall short of Philosophy, and live under the pitch of 
Heathenism. 

DIVISION 2nd. 

I shall now, in the second place, proceed to the censures of the State ; 
and show in a few words how much the Stage stands discouraged by the 
Laws of other countries and our own. 

To begin with the Athenians. This people, though none of the worst 
friends to the Play-House, ' thought a comedy so unreputable a Perform- 
ance, that they made a law that no Judge of the Areopagus should make 
one.' 

I come next to the Lacedemonians, who were remarkable for the 
wisdom of their laws, the sobriety of their manners, and their breeding 
of brave men. This government would not endure the Stage in any 
form, nor under any regulation. 

To pass on to the Romans. Tully informs us that their predecessors 
counted all Stage Plays uncreditable and scandalous. Insomuch that 
any Roman who turned actor was not only to be degraded, but likewise 
as it were disincorporated and unnaturalized by the order of the Censors. 

St. Augustine, in the same book, commends the Romans for refusing 
the Jus Civitatis to Players, for seizing their Freedoms, and making 
them perfectly foreign to their Government. 

In the Theadosian Code, Players are called Persona intronesta, that is 
to translate it softly, persons maimed and blemished in their reputation. 
Their Pictures might be seen at the Play-House, but were not permitted 
to hang in any creditable place of the Town. Upon this text Gothofred 
tells us the function of Players was counted scandalous by the civil Law. 
And that those who came upon the Stage to divert the people, had a 
mark of infamy set upon them. Famosi sunt ex edicto. 

I shall now come 10 our own Constitution. And I find by 39 Eliz. 
cap. 4, 1, Jac. cap. 7, That all Bearmards,* common Players of Inter- 
lude, Counterfeit Egyptians, &c, shall be taken, adjudged Rogues, 
Vagabonds and sturdy beggars, and shall sustain all pain and punish- 
ment, as in this Act is in that behalf appointed. The penalties are infa- 
mous to the last degree, and capital too, unless they give over. 'Tis 
true, the first Act excepts those Players which belong to a Baron or 



* Persons who kept bear gardens cr places of indecent entertainment. 
11 



82 



other Personage of higher degree, and are authorized to Play under the 
hand and seal of such Baron or Personage. But by the later Statute, 
this privilege of Licensing is taken away. And all of them are expressly 
brought under the penalty without distinction. 

About the year 1580, there was a Petition made to Queen Elizabeth, 
for suppressing of Play-Houses. 'Tis somewhat remarkable, and there- 
fore I shall transcribe some part of the relation. 

Many goodly Citizens, and other well disposed Gentlemen of London, 
considering that Play-Houses and Dicing-Houses were Traps for young 
Gentlemen and others, and perceiving the many inconveniences and great 
damage that would ensue upon the long suffering of the same, not only 
to particular persons but to the whole City ; and that it would also be a 
gieat disparagement to the Governois, and a dishonour to the Govern 
ment of this honourable city, if they should any longer continue, ac- 
quainted some pious Magistrates therewith, desiring them to take some 
course for the suppression of common Play-Houses, within the city of 
London and Liberties thereof ; who thereupon made humble suit to 
Queen Elizabeth and her Privy Council, and obtained leave of her 
Majesty to thrust the Players out of the City, and to put down all Play- 
Houses and Dicing-Houses within their Liberties, which accordingly 
was effected. And ihe Play-Houses in Grace-Church street, &c, were 
quite put down and suppressed. 

I shall give a modern instance or two from France, and so conclude 
these authorities. 

In the year 1696, we are informed by a Dutch Print, (M. L' 'Archevique 
appugi, &c.,) That the Lord Arch-Bishop, 'supported by the interest of 
some religious persons at Court, has done his utmost to suppress the 
Public Theatres by degrees; or at least to clear them of Profaneness.' 

And last summer the Gazettes in the Paris Article affirm: — That the 
King has " ordered the Italian Players to retire out of France, because 
they did not observe his Majesties Orders, but represented immodest 
pieces, and did not correct their obscenities and indecent gestures." 

The same Intelligence the next week after, acquaints us, that 'some 
persons of the first quality at Court, who were the Protectors of these 
Comedians, had solicited the French King to re-call his order against 
them, but their request had no success.' 

And here to put an end to the modern authorities, I shall subjoin a 
sort of Pastoral Letter published about two years since by the Bishop of 
Arras, in Flanders. The Reader shall have as much of it as concerns 
him in both Languages. 

An Order of the most Illustrious and most Reverend Lord Bishop of 
Arras against Plays. 

Guy De Seve De Roche Chonart, by the grace of God, &c, Bishop 
of Arras: To all the Faithful in the Town of Arras, Health and Bene- 
diction. A man must be very ignorant of his Religion, not to know the 
great disgust it has always declared for Publick Sights, and for Plays in 
particular. The Holy Fathers condemn them in their writings ; they 
look upon them as reliques of Heathenism and schools of Debauchery. 
They have been always abominated by the Church; and notwithstanding 
those who are concerned in this scandalous Profession are not absolutely 



S3 



expelled by a formal Excommunication, yet she publicly refuses them 
the Sacraments, and omits nothing upon all occasions, to show her aver- 
sion for this employment, and to transfuse the same sentiments into her 
children. The Rituals of the best governed Dioceses have ranged the 
Players among those whom the Parish Priests are obliged to treat as 
Excommunicated Persons. 

Unless, therefore, we have a mind to condemn the Church, the Holy 
Fathers, and the most holy Bishops, 'tis impossible to justify Plays ; 
neither is the defence of those less impracticable, who by their Counte- 
nance of these Diversions, not only have their share of the mischief done 
there, but contribute at the same time to fix these unhappy ministeis of 
Satan in a Profession, which by depriving them of the sacraments of the 
Church, leaves them under a constant necessity of sinning, and out of 
all hopes of being saved, unless they give it over. 

DIVISION 3rd. 

1 shall now, in the Third place, give a short account of the sense of 
the Primitive Church concerning the Stage. And first, I shall instance 
in her Councils. 

The Council of Illiberis, or Collioure in Spain, decrees, ' That it shall 
not be lawful for any woman who is either in full communion or a pro- 
bationer for Baptism, to marry, or entertain any Comedians or Actors; 
whoever takes this liberty shall be excommunicated.' 

The first Council of Aries runs thus : ' Concerning Players, we have 
thought fit to excommunicate them as long as they continue to act.' 

The second Council of Aries made their 20th Canon to the same pur- 
pose, and almost in the same words. 

The Third Council of Carthage, of which St. Augustine was a mem- 
ber, ordains, 'That the Sons of Bishops, or other Clergymen, should not 
be permitted to furnish out Public Shows, or plays, or be present at 
them : Such sort of Pagan Entertainments being forbidden all the Laity. 
It being always unlawful for all Christians to come amongst Blas- 
phemers.' 

The second council of Chaalon sets forth, That Clergymen ought to 
abstain fiom all over-engaging Entertainments in Music or Show — 
(oculorum, auriumque ellicebris.) And as for the smutty and licentious 
insolence of Players and Buffoons, let them not only decline the hearing 
it themselves, but likewise conclude the Laity obliged to the same con- 
duct. 

TESTIMONY OP THE FATHERS. 

To begin with Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, who lived in the second 
century. ' 'Tis not lawful (says he) for us to be present at the Prizes of 
your Gladiators, lest by this means we should be Accessaries to the min- 
ders there committed. Neither dare we presume upon the liberty of 
your other shows, lest our senses should be tinctured, and disobliged 
with indecency and profaneness. God forbid that Christians, who are 
remarkable for Modesty and Reservedness ; who are obliged to Discipline 
and trained up in virtue; God forbid, I say, that we should dishonour 
our thoughts, much less our practice, with such wickedness as this.' 



84 



Tertullian, who lived at the latter end of this century, is copious upon 
this subject. I shall translate but some part of it. In his Apologetick 
he thus addresses the Heathens: 1 We keep off from your Public Shows 
because we can't understand the warrant of their Original. There's 
superstition and Idolatry in the case. And we dislike the entertainment 
because we dislike the reason of its Institution. Besides, we have no- 
thing to do with the Frensies of the Race-Ground, the Lewdness of the 
Play-House, or the Barbarities of the Bear-Garden. The Epicureans 
had the Liberty to state the Notion and determine the Object of Pleasure. 
Why can't we have the same Privilege'? What offence is it then if we 
differ from you in the idea of satisfaction? If we won't understand to 
brighten our Humour, and live pleasantly, where's the harm? If any 
body has the worst of it, 'tis only ourselves.' 

His Book de Spectaculis was wrote on purpose to dissuade the Chris- 
tians from the publick Diversions of the Heathens, of which the Play- 
House was one. In his first chapter he gives them to understand, ' That 
the tenour of their Faith, the Reason of Principle, and the Order of Dis- 
cipline, had bai'd them the Entertainments of the Town. And therefore 
he exhorts them to refresh their Memories, to run up to their Baptism, 
and recollect their first Engagements. For without care, Pleasure is a 
strange bewitching Thing. When it gets the Ascendant 'twill keep on 
Ignorance for an excuse of Liberty, make a man's Conscience wink, and 
suborn his Reason against himself. 

' But as he goes on, some people's Faith is either too full of Scruples, 
or too barren of Sense. Nothing will serve to settle them but a plain 
text of Scripture. They hover in uncertainty because it is not said as 
expressly, thou shalt not go to the Play-House, as 'tis thou shalt not 
kill. But this looks more like Fencing than Argument. For we have 
the meaning of the prohibition, though not the sound, in the first Psalm — 
Blessed is the man that walks not in Counsel of the ungodly, nor stands 
in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful. 5 

The Censors, whose business it was to take care of regularity and 
manners, looked on these Play-Houses as no other than Batteries upon 
Virtue and Sobriety, and for this reason often pulled them down before 
they were w 7 ell built. So ihat here we can argue from the Precedents 
of mere Nature, and plead the Heathens against themselves. 

And granting the regards of Quality, the advantages of age, or Tem- 
per, may fortify some people ; granting Modesty secured and the Diver- 
sion refined as it were by this means ; yet a man must not expect to 
stand by perfectly unmoved and impregnable. No body can be pleased 
without Sensible Impressions; nor can such Perceptions be received 
without a train of Passions attending them. These Consequences will 
be sure to work back upon their Causes, solicit the Fancy, and heighten 
the original pleasure. But if a man pretends to be a Stoic at Plays, he 
falls under another imputation. For where there is no impression, there 
can be no pleasure. And then the Spectator is very much impertinent 
in going where he gets nothing for his Pains. And if this were all, I 
suppose Christians have something else to do than to ramble about to no 
purpose. 

' Even those very Magistrates who abet the Stage, discountenance the 
Players. They stigmatize their Character, and cramp their Freedoms. 



I 

85 

The whole Tribe of them is thrown out of all honour and privilege. 
They are neither suffered to be Lords nor Gentlemen. To come within 
the Senate, or harangue the people, or so much as to be Members of a 
Common Council. Now what Caprice and Inconsistency is this ! To 
love what we punish, and lessen those whom we admire! To cry up 
the Mystery, and censure the Practice; for a man to be as it were 
eclipsed upon the score of Merit is certainly an odd sort of Justice ! 
True. But the Inference is stronger another way. What a confession 
then is this of an 111 Business, when the very Excellency of it is not 
without Infamy. 

4 Since, theiefore, human Prudence has thought fit to degrade the 
Stage ,notvvithstanding the Divertingness of it : Since Pleasure can't 
make them an interest here, nor shelter them from Censure, How will 
they be able to stand the shock of Divine Justice, and what Reckoning 
have they Reason to expect Hereafter'? 

' Will you not then avoid this seat of Infection ? The very Air suffers 
by their Impurities; and they almost pronounce the Plague. What 
though the peifonnance may be in some measure pretty and entertain- 
ing? What though Innocence, yes, and Virtue, too, shines through 
some part of it? 'Tis not the custom to prepare poison unpalatable, nor 
make up Ratsbane with Rhubarb and Sena. No. To have the mis- 
chief speed, they must oblige the Sense, and make the Dose pleasant. 
Thus the Devil throws in a Cordial Drop to make the draught go down, 
and steals some few Ingredients fiom the Dispensatory of Heaven.' 

Clemens Alexandrinus affirms, ' That the Circus and Theatre may 
not improperly be called the Chair of Pestilence. Away then with 
these Lewd, Ungodly Diversions, and which are but Impertinence at the 
Best. What part of Impudence, either in words or practice, is omitted, 
by the Stage? Don't the Buffoons take almost all manner of Liberties, 
and plunge through Thick and Thin, to make a jest? Now those who 
are affected with a vicious satisfaction will be haunted with the Idea, 
and spread the Infection. But if a man is not entertained, to what pur- 
pose should he go ihithei ? Why should he be found where he finds no- 
thing, and court that which sleeps upon the sense? If 'tis said these 
Diversions are taken only to unbend the mind, and refresh Nature a 
little. To this 1 answer. That the spaces between Business should not 
be filled up with such Rubbish. A wise man has a Guard upon his 
Recreations, and always prefers the Profitable to the Pleasant.' 

St. Cyprian, or the Author de Spectaculis, will furnish us farther. 

Here this Father argues against those who thought the Play House 
no unlawful Diversion, because 'twas not condemned by express Scrip- 
ture. ' Let Mere Modesty (says he) supply the Holy Text, and let 
Nature govern where Revelation does not reach. Some things are too 
black to lie upon Paper, and are more strongly forbidden because unmen- 
tioned. The Divine Wisdom must have had a low opinion of Christians 
had it descended to particulars in this case. Silence is sometimes the 
best method for Authority. 5 

And after having described the infamous Diversions of the Play 
House, he expostulates in this manner: — ' What business has a Christ- 
ian at such Places as these? A Christian who has not the Liberty so 
much as to think of an ill thing. A Christian has much better sights 



86 



than these to look at. He has solid Satisfactions in his Power which 
will please and improve him at the same time." 

ST. CHRYSOSTON. 

' Most people fancy the Unlawfulness of going to Plays is not clear. 
But by their favour, a world of Disorders are the Consequences of such 
a Liberty. 

'Let us not only avoid downright Sinning, but the Tendencies to it. 
Some indifferent Things are fatal in the Consequence, and strike us at 
the rebound. Now who would choose his standing within an Inch of a 
Fall, or swim upon the Verge of a Whirlpool? He that walks upon a 
Piecipice, shakes though he does not tumble ; and commonly his Con- 
cern brings him to the Bottom. The Case is much the same in refer- 
ence to Conscience and Morality. He that won't keep his Distance 
from the Gulph, is oftentimes sucked in by the Eddy, and the least over- 
sight is enough to undo him.' 

He says what is most to be lamented, you are not at all uneasy at 
such Licentiousness. You Laugh when you should Frown, and Com- 
mend what you ought to Abhor. Hark you, you can keep the Lan- 
guage of your own House in order. If your Servant's or your Child- 
ren's Tongues run Riot, they presently smart for it. And yet at the 
Play House you are quite another thing. These little Buffoons have a 
strange Ascendant! A luscious sentence is hugely welcome from their 
mouth; and instead of Censure, they have thanks and encouragement for 
their Pains. Now if a man would be so just as to wonder at himself, 
here is Madness and Contradiction in Abundance. 

' But I know you'll say, what is this to me, I neither sing nor pro- 
nounce any of this lewd stuff? Granting your plea, what do you get by 
it? If you don't repeat these Scurrilities, you are very willing to hear 
them. Now whether the Ear, or the Tongue is mismanaged, comes 
much to the same reckoning. The difference of the Organ does not 
alter the Action so mightily as you may imagine. But pray how do 
you prove you don't repeat them? They may be your Discourse, or the 
entertainments of your Closet, for ought we know to the contrary. 
This is certain, you hear them with pleasure in your Face, and make it 
your business to run after them; and to my mind, these are strong Ar- 
guments of your Approbation. 

'You'll say, I can give you many Instances where the Play-House 
has done no harm. Don't mistake. Throwing away of Time, and ill 
example has a great deal of Harm in it ; and thus far you are guilty at 
the best. For granting your own Virtue impenetrable and out of Reach, 
granting the Protection of your Temper has brought you off unhurt, are 
all People thus fortified? By no means. However, many a weak Bro- 
ther has ventured after you, and miscarried upon your Precedent. And 
since you make others thus Faulty, how can you be Innocent yourself? 
All the people undone There, will lay their Ruin at your Door. The 
Company are all Accessary to the mischief of the Place. For were 
there no Audience, we should have no Acting; and therefore those who 
join in the Crime, will ne'er be parted in the Punishment. Granting 
your Modesty has secured you, which, by the way, I believe nothing of ; 



S7 



yet since many have been debauched by the Play-House, you must ex- 
pect a severe Reckoning for giving them Encouragement. Though 
after all as Virtuous as you are, I doubt not, you would have been much 
Better had you kept away. 

' In fine, let us not dispute to no purpose ; the practice won't bear De- 
fence. Where the cause is naught, 'tis in vain to rack our Reason, 
and strain for Pretences. The best excuse for what is past, is to stand 
clear from the danger and do so no more.' 

One citation more from St. Chrysostom, and I take leave. In 
the Preface* of his Commentary upon St. John's Gospel speaking of 
Plays and other Public Shows, he has these words: — 

' But what need I branch out the lewdness of those Spectacles, and be 
particular in Description? For what's there to be met with but lewd 
Laughing, but Smut, Railing, and Buffoonry? In a word, 'Tis all Scan- 
dal and Confusion. Observe me, I speak to you all, Let none who par- 
take of this Holy Table unqualify himself with such Mortal Diversions." 
Again, " What harm say you is there in going to a play? Is that suffi- 
cient to keep one from the Communion? I ask, can there be a more 
shameless sin than to come to the holy table defiled with adultery? 
Hear the words of him who is to be our Judge. Jesus Christ saith, 
" Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed 
adultery with her already in his heart." What can be said of those 
who spend whole days in these places in looking on women of ill fame? 
With what face will they pretend to say, they did not behold them to 
lust after them? They see women adorned on purpose to inspire lust, 
and if in the Church itself, where Psalms are sung, the Scriptures read, 
and the face of the Almighty appears, lust will creep in like a thief, 
how shall they overcome the motions of concupiscence who frequent 
the Stage?" 

TESTIMONIES AGAINST THE STAGE AS IT HAS BEEN CONDUCTED IN MORE 
MODERN TIMES. 

Whoever has carefully read the foregoing description and condemna- 
tions of the ancient stage, and the pleas put in for it by some Christians 
of these days, and know any thing by personal observation, reading or 
hearing of modern plays and their advocates among the professors of 
religion, must be forcibly struck with the resemblance between them all. 
That connection will be increased by a few passages from later writers 
and the censure of more modern branches of the Church of Christ. 

As to the latter suffice it to say, that all the Protestant Churches of 
Europe have, in one form or other, condemned it, or enacted regulations 
against it, as existing since the Reformation. The Churches of France, 
Holland and Scotland have declared it to be unlawful to go to comedies, 
tragedies, interludes, faices, or other stage plays, acted in public or pri- 
vate ; because in all ages these have been forbidden among Christians, 
as bringing in a corruption of good manners." 

Let us hear the testimony of a few eminent individuals. Chief Jus- 
tice Hale thus speaks : — 

"Gaming and plays, as they are pernicious, and corrupt youth, so if 
they had no other fault, they are justly to be declined in respect to their 



88 



excessive expence of time, and habituating men to idleness and vain 
thoughts, and disturbing passions when they are past as well as when 
they are used." 

MR. WILBERFORCE. 

" There has been much argument concerning the lawfulness of theat- 
rical amusements. Let it be sufficient to remark, that the controversy 
would be shoit indeed, if the question were to be tried by the criterion 
of love to the Supreme Being. If there were any thing of that sensibili- 
ty for the honor of God, and of that zeal in his service, which we show 
in behalf of our earthly friends, or of our political connections, we 
should not seek our pleasures in that place, which the debauchee in- 
flamed with wine, or bent on the gratification of other licentious appe- 
tites, finds most congenial to his state and temper of mind. In that 
place, from the neighborhood of which decorum, and modesty, and regu- 
larity retire, while riot and lewdness are invited to the spot, and invaria- 
bly select it for their chosen residence; where the sacred name of God is 
often profaned; where sentiments are often heard with delight, and mo- 
tions and gestures often applauded, which would not be tolerated in 
private company." 

To this let me add the testimony of Sir John Hawkins, who, as one 
says, was never considered over rigid or illiberal : — " Although it is 
said of plays that they teach morality, and of the stage, that it is the 
mirror of life; these assertions are mere declamations, and have no foun- 
dation either in truth or experience. On the contrary, a play-house and 
the region about it are the very hotbeds of vice." 

I might add the testimonies of many professed unbelievers to the 
above. Let it suffice to say, that Lord Kaimes denounces the Theatre as 
most poisonous to the youth of England, and that even Rosseau opposed 
the establishment of a Theatre at Geneva, speaking of it thus: "It is 
impossible that an establishment so contrary to our ancient manners can 
be generally applauded. Where (he asks) would be the imprudent 
mother who would dare to cany her daughter to this dangerous school ; 
and how many respectable women would think they dishonoured them- 
selves in going there?" 

I conclude these European testimonies, by referring to one of the best 
treatises against the stage that has ever appeared. I allude to the one 
written by Mis. Hannah More, who has sometimes been quoted as a 
friend to the stage, because in early life she wrote two plays, which were 
acted with much applause, an applause excited by the loud huzzas of 
Johnson, Boswell and others. But let it be remembered, it was at that 
very time that she awakened to the evil of the stage, absented herself 
from her own applauded performances, and perhaps was meditating that 
admirable argument against the theatre, by which she hoped to counter- 
act any evil of her own previous example. Let it be remembered also, 
that it was that same inconsistent Dr. Johnson who said concerning 
Bishop Collier's book against the Stage, from which I have taken the 
preceding extracts, that such was its effect, "that the wise and pious 
caught the alarm; and the nation wondered why it had suffered irreligion 
and licentiousness to be openly taught at the public charge." 



89 



AMERICAN PROTESTS. 

As to American protests against the Theatre and other corrupting 
amusements, one would think that the following, to which I have al- 
ready alluded, from our own American Congress, ought to suffice. On 
the 12th of October, 1778, the following preamble and resolution were 
adopted : 

" Whereas true religion and good morals are the only solid foundation 
of public liberty and happiness : 

11 Resolved, That it be and is hereby earnestly recommended to the 
several States to take the most effectual measures for the encouragement 
thereof, and for the suppressing of theatrical entertainments, horse racing, 
gaming, and such other diversions as are productive of idleness, dissipa- 
tion, and a general depravity of manners." 

Eighteen members voted against it. Amongst those in its favor, we 
are happy to see the names of such men as Samuel Adams and Gerry, 
of Massachusetts; Sherman and Ellsworth, of Connecticut; Robert Mor- 
ris and Roberdean, of Pennsylvania; Richard Henry Lee and Marsden 
Smith, of Virginia ; Laurens and Matthews, of South Carolina. 

As to the protests of different denominations of Christians in our land, 
and the discipline exercised by them in relation to the same, I need not 
speak. The earliest protest against the Theatre in anything like an ar- 
gument, was one set forth by the clergy of all denominations in Philadel- 
phia, and written, I believe, either by Bishop White or Dr. Green. In 
the writings of Dr. Witherspoon and Dr. Dwight, Presidents of Prince- 
ton and Yale Colleges, we have some forcible and just appeals to the 
piety of Christians and the purity of the female sex to discountenance 
this evil entertainment. 

The burning of the Richmond Theatre called forth throughout our 
land the most powerful arguments and pathetic addresses on the subject, 
while the erection of the Monumental Church on the ruins of the same, 
and the choice of Bishop Moore as its pastor, excited the proud hope that 
another would never rear its head in Richmond, or, if so, would never 
be encouraged by a communicant of the Episcopal Church. 



12 



SOME NOTICES OF DANCING AS A RELIGIOUS EXERCISE, AS WELL AS 
WORLDLY AMUSEMENT. 



Although both the resolution and canon referred to in the foregoing 
pages, specify public balls as the object of their condemnation, because in 
them dancing is more apt to be seen in its most objectionable form, and 
with its greatest concomitant evils, of dress, expense, excess, evil com* 
munications, etc., yet, as the exercise of it elsewhere but prepares for, 
and tempts to it here, and it is liable to some of the same objections in 
any place where it is practiced, a few remarks as to its origin, history, 
and usual effects, are subjoined, and more especially because the Scrip- 
tures are often appealed to for authority. 

Considered as a mere movement of the limbs, unstudied and untaught, 
it is the natural and innocent expression of the light and joyous feelings 
of children in their pastimes, and in which the voice will be apt to take 
some part. Older persons also of a peculiar temperament, when under 
some high pleasurable excitement, whether from wine, strong drink, or 
other stimulus, are apt thus to leap and sing. Deranged persons too, if 
of a happy instead of melancholy turn, are sometimes disposed to this 
Use of the limbs and voice. Wherefore we find Cicero, when condemn- 
ing the exercise as unbecoming a Roman citizen, says, "Scarcely any 
sober person dances, unless he is deranged, either in solitude or at a 
modest supper." (Nemo fere saltat sobrius, nisi insanit, neque in soli- 
tudine, neque in convivio honesto.) He says it was done at the conclu- 
sion of unseasonable feasts, in merry places, with many luxuries. The 
question whether it was wrong in itself was, it seems, as difficult then as 
now, since it was never practised by itself. The history of dancing, 
however, apart from this tendency of our nature to its simple, unstudied 
exercise, when highly excited, is peculiar, and deserves consideration. 
We read of it at an early period in the history of all nations, in connec- 
tion with certain religious celebrations, in which thanksgivings were 
offered up for some great deliverances or favors. Thus, immediately 
after the passage through the Red sea, we find Moses and the Israelites 
singing a noble song of praise to Jehovah, while Miriam and her women 
responded, she with a timbrel in her hand, and both she and they using 
some becoming and sympathetic motions of body called dances, but 
doubtless very different from those now used. There is no reason for 
supposing that this was the first time such a mode of thanksgiving was 
adopted, but much for believing that it had a previous existence among 
the Jews and other nations. Soon after this we find the fickle and impa- 
tient Jews, at the very foot of Mount Sinai, dancing around the golden 
calf which they had made to be their god. They sacrificed to him, then 
sat down to eat and to drink of the sacrifice, and rose up to play or 
dance. Again, when David brought the aik up to the city, he laid aside 
his royal robes, put on a linen ephod, and was seen "leaping and danc- 
ing before the Lord with all his might;" insomuch that Michael, his 
wife, despised him in her heart, for thus uncovering himself and making 



91 



himself as one of the foolish young men. Out of this circumstance in 
David's life there grew up a custom in Israel for a number of persons to 
meet together once a year, and by the stimulus of the whole choir, and 
all the instruments of music in the temple, to dance and clap their hands 
with joy. We read the same also in Church history of certain Chris- 
tians in the east, who celebrated the resurrection of Christ at Easter by 
singing, dancing and clapping their hands in the temples. In our coun- 
try to this day there are some small societies who thus worship. Such 
persons have not only justified themselves by the examples of David, 
Miriam and others, but by certain passages in the Psalms which speak 
of praising God "in the dance," or "with dances." Learned men, 
however, have thought that those passages do not refer to the motions of 
the limbs, in such dancings, but rather to the instruments of music, and 
the playing on them in public worship, though certain motions of the 
arms and head may have accompanied them. Similar exercises were 
used in pagan worship. As paganism in all its forms was only a corrup- 
tion of the true Patriarchal religion, so many modes of its worship were 
borrowed from God's ancient people, and most probably this. Athenceus 
tells us that at the first, when they believed that the gods were their in- 
visible guests, their dancing after sacrificial feasts was modest and their 
eating and drinking temperate. Afterwards, both himself and Plato say, 
that they degenerated into occasions of impurity and excess. Do we not 
see something of this very tendency in the sad account given by St. Paul 
of the abuse of the Lord's supper, even among the first Christians, which 
made it necessary to have it placed under the strongest safeguards. 
Nothing can be more clear from all history than that dancing, both be- 
fore and for sometime after its corruption, formed a large part of the 
heathen worship, and that as unworthy views of their deities became 
prevalent, so their worship became more corrupt. Nor was it to be ex- 
pected that this use of the body would always be employed only in the 
bervice of God. From praising the deity or deities, men began to praise, 
heroes and heroines in song and dance, and to gratify all their own tastes, 
passions and lusts in the same. From the sacrificial feasts, music and" 
dancing found their way to other entertainments, though something of 
their religious chaiacter may have gone with them, for the heathen had 
household gods whom they sought to propitiate. Cicero, Atticus and 
others inform us, that the more sober-minded, instead of the music and 
dancing at their feasts, performed by a band of persons hired for the pur- 
pose, would have some one to read choice passages from their best books 
to those who were at supper. Amongst the Egyptians, a skeleton was 
introduced to remind the guests of their mortality, and admonish them 
to be temperate. Among the Romans and Grecians who adopted the 
custom, this was soon perverted. Instead of its being a "memento 
mori," the Romans made the master of the feast to point to it, saying, 
"Vivamus, dum licet esse, bene," (let us live while we live); while 
the Grecians made him say words to this effect: "Drink and | be 
merry, for thus shalt thou be after death." No one, after reading these 
words, can be at a loss for St. Paul's allusion when he says, though in 
condemnation, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die." Thus 
does man pervert the best institutions, whether human or divine. Let 
me illustrate this by another instance. We read that God divided the 



92 



land of Israel among the tribes and families by lot, and directed its use 
for other purposes, saying, " The lot is cast into the lap, but the whole 
disposing thereof is of the Lord." Believing in this assurance, it has 
been used on certain occasions among Jews and Christians, ever since, 
even to the choice of an Apostle to supply the place of Judas. The 
Pagans soon had their god, to whom they appealed in like manner. 
" Sed te nos facimus fortuna Deam, coeloque locamus." The Philoso- 
phers laughed at both Jews and Gentiles, and called it chance. All 
men know how soon this religious institution was perverted. Augustus 
introduced into his feasts a game called the Lottery, which is substan- 
tially the same with our lotteries at this day. And what are all the 
games of chance which have been and are to this day, but perversions of 
God's ordinance 1 ? What mischief have they not done? What vice and 
misery have they not spread over the world, — baffling all the efforts of 
Churches and civil rulers to suppress them'? Christians have always 
objected to them, because there was either pagan idolatry or philosophi- 
cal atheism in them, — either an appeal to an imaginary deity, fortune, 
or else to the atheist's god, chance. Thus has it been with this once re- 
ligious exercise of dancing. So entirely has it been applied to other and 
different purposes, that the Church of God, by her. laws and ministers, 
has at different times been obliged to denounce it, as displeasing to God, 
because used in the service of the world, the flesh and the devil, though 
she has very properly used some explanatory word, as wanton or immod- 
est, that she might not even seem to cast reproach on what the pious 
have practised, as we read in Scripture. 

In pursuing the history of this amusement, we find that it was not 
used among the ancients as an exercise for promoting health (a plea 
sometimes put in for it) , since far more manly and suitable sports were 
adopted for this end, but was cultivated as an art by certain persons, in 
connection with music, for purposes of gain. It was seen with more or 
less that was objectionable at private or public entertainments.* Others, 

* To such, music and dancing our Lord most probably refers in the parable of the prodi- 
gal son. Approbation, however, of such, cannot fairly be inferred. It is only a compari- 
son instituted between the joy of an earthly father, at the reformation and return of a 
son, exhibited by a part of the good things of this world, and that of angels at the conver- 
sion of a sinner to God. If we press the analogy further than this, we shall feel called 
upon to celebrate the conversion of a sinner to God at this day by feasting and mirth, 
which all would condemn. Our Lord and all the inspired writers were in the habit of 
representing heavenly by earthly things, even by some confessedly sinful. Thus, in the 
very next chapter, our attention to the future welfare of the soul is urged by the parable 
of the unjust steward, whose wise forethought is commended to our imitation, but surely 
not his unjust manner of showing it. St. Paul, in several places, refers to the races and 
bloody combats of the ancient amphitheatres, when he exhorts Christians to "be temper- 
ate in all things," "to press towards the prize," "to strive as in an agony," "to resist 
even unto blood : " following the example of those who, after much previous training, put 
forth all their strength in the combat, were often covered with blood, and sometimes died 
in the strife, amidst the shouts of the spectators. He even compares all that host of holy 
men mentioned in his epistle to the Hebrews, "of whom the world was not worthy, and 
who died in the faith," to those thousands, and sometimes hundreds of thousands, of idle, 
dissolute and blood-thirsty persons, who hung like clouds in the air on the seats around 
and above the combatants, and bids Christians be animated by the invisible presence of 
these faithful departed ones, in running their race and fighting their fight, as these others 
were by those who encouraged them to the contest. And yet, horrid as were these 
amusements, the Apostle in using them as comparisons does not stop to condemn them. 
If, indeed, we had heard of our Lord or any of the Apostles frequenting such places for 
amusement, then their silence might fairly be considered as approbation, and we might 
follow their example as to similar things of the present day. Our Lord did once honor 



93 



with a view to pleasure and admiration, imitated the exquisite skill of 
these performers. Thus we find Herodias so delighting Herod, whose 
family had introduced all Roman and Grecian amusements into Judea, as 
to lead to the tragic death of John the Baptist. At the time of the in- 
troduction of Christianity into the world, dancing by piacticed performers 
made a part of all the public shows and theatrical exhibitions of Greece 
and Rome, as well as of many private entertainments. Together with 
all its companions, it was denounced as being a part of that "lust of the 
flesh, lust of the eye, and pride of life," which the Scriptures declare 
to be not of God, but of the world, and the Church reckoned to be among 
those pomps and vanities renounced at baptism. We do not find that 
there was any recognition of it as practiced in any form, so as to be en- 
couraged among Christians ; but as the sober-minded of the Romans con- 
sidered it unbecoming a citizen to dance, as public performers were de- 
prived of certain privileges of citizenship, so the Fathers speak of it as 
unbecoming Christians, from their childhood up, taught and practised as 
it was at that day. Wherefore we find St. Ambrose saying of such 
things, "Let mothers teach their children prayers , not dances." As to 
the places where it was practiced, he says, " Where the timbrels sound, 
the pipe makes a noise, the harp clatters, the cymbals shake together, what 
fear of the Lord can there be." St. Chrysostom says of the act itself, 
" God hath not given us legs to dance, but to walk modestly." " Where 
wanton dancing is, there the devil is present." St. Basil says, "Instead 
of stirring up thy feet, and jumping furiously, thou oughtest to bend thy 
knees in prayer." These expressions shew, that the same pleas were 
put in for the amusement at that day which are now used, and that 
the same answers were made. The exciting and engrossing entertain- 
ment still continued, however, to be indulged by some, and as the days 
of thick darkness and deep depravity came on, was more and more the 

■with, his presence a marriage in Galilee, as his ministers have done ever since, when called 
on to legalize and bless the nuptials, and we have reason to believe that music and dan- 
cing, more or less unbecoming, was oftentimes, then as now, introduced, though the modo 
of it may have differed much. But as in far the greater number of marriages at this day 
they are not admitted, being objected to by the more pious and sober minded, so it doubt- 
less was then, since we find even some of the Pagans banishing them from their feasts 
and substituting more sober enjoyments. Even some ministers of religion, it must be 
acknowledged, have, in every age, preferred the more festive and merry weddings, while 
the graver and more devoted ones have discouraged them and soon left the places where 
they were introduced, as the primitive canons enjoined it on all Christians to do. Whether 
our Lord preferred the more sober or the others, whether, if now on earth, he would 
unite in practice with those few of his ministers who encourage such things by their 
presence, or with those many who disapprove, let the reader judge. There is a circum- 
stance mentioned in connection with the marriage in Galilee which merits a passing 
notice, as it has perplexed and distressed some pious persons to whom it seems to repre- 
sent our Lord as encouraging not only merry making, but drunkenness. The wine being 
consumed more was wanted, and our Lord, by a miracle, furnished some of the best kind. 
The master of the feast institutes a comparison between our Lord and others, as to the 
supply of wine, his being the best, their's of a meaner sort. There is not the slightest inti- 
mation of any thing like intemperance at that feast, that our Lord should, by a miracle, 
have increased it, and thereby given a perpetual sanction to intemperance, while scripture 
declares that drunkards should never enter heaven, is utterly incredible. The fact which is 
stated of its being the best wine is worthy of notice. It is well established, that the purest 
and best wine in ancient times was the least intoxicating. He who did all things well, 
doubtless furnished the guests with that least liable to be abused to intemperance, while it 
was still most healthful and pleasant. We only add, that if figures, parables and allusions, 
justify all those things from whence they are drawn, and to which they refer, then may 
almost any evil custom or act be sanctioned, not only by Scripture, but by every sermon 
that is preached or book that is written. 



94 



delight of those who knew not what the happiness of true religion is. 
It surely ought to be a source of jealousy and apprehension with the 
Christian as to this amusement, that not content with appropriating to it- 
self a poition of the time allotted to worldly pursuits, it made such large 
inroads upon that blessed day which God has commanded us to keep 
holy, and this too without the least pretence of restoring the exercise to 
its original use ; for if that were attempted, the amusement would soon 
be abandoned by those most devoted to it. If religion were now seen 
mingling with the dance, as has been said, the ball room would soon be 
deserted. For many centuries, with some kindred diversions, it has pos- 
sessed itself of a portion of the Sabbath through a large part of Chris- 
tendom, that is, wherever the Romish Church prevails, which thus not 
only robs us of one-half of a sacrament, but gives up one-half of the 
Lord's-day to the world. With great difficulty was it dispossessed in 
our mother Church and land, and it is believed that it still holds some 
possession in parts of Protestant Europe where Romish influence and 
example are great. The increase of Romanism in our land, especially 
in the west, by the immense European emigration going on, is not likely 
to preserve our Sabbaths from some share of this desecration. From 
being delighted with the amusement during the evenings of the week, 
even until the hour that ushers in the Sabbath morning, the lovers there- 
of, even some born of Protestant parents, may become reconciled thus to 
close the Sabbath, and so neither the out-goings of its morning or even- 
ing may be made to praise him who has commanded us to keep that day 
holy. That such a reconciling of ourselves to that, of which at the first 
there is a shuddering horror, which makes one exclaim, " Am I a dog, 
that 1 should do this thing," is not impossible, I mention the following 
circumstance: — A few yeais since, when traveling in a public stage 
through one of our western States, I heard a young lady, who was re- 
turning fiom a Romish school to spend her vacation at home, give an 
account of the Sabbath exercises there. A part of the day was spent in 
dancing, which at first so distressed her, being brought up a Protestant, 
that she hung her head out of the window, and would not look at it. 
After a time, however, she learned to witness it without emotion, and 
then with pleasure, and then to take part in it, and at length to delight 
in it. She also entreated the person to whom she was speaking not to 
let her mother, who was a pious woman, hear of it, as she feared it 
might prevent her being allowed to go back to the delightful place. 

Such being the history of this exercise, the question is, as to its con- 
tinuance, whether as a religious act, or as an amusement 1 Since it was 
never enjoined as a part either of Jewish or Christian worship, we aie 
under no obligation to restore it, and can have no sufficient inducement 
to do it, seeing that it could only suit, even in its best form, a very early 
and simple state of society. As an amusement, seeing that it is a per- 
version of an ancient religious exercise, and has ever been discouraged 
by the sober-minded and pious of all nations on account of its evil ten- 
dencies and accompaniments, we ought conscientiously to enquire, 
whether its great liability to abuse, and its many acknowledged abuses, 
should not make us frown upon it in all its forms? 1 will briefly allude 
to some of the objections to it. 

1st. When taught to the young at an early age, it is attended with an 



95 



expense of time and money which might be far better employed ; it pro- 
motes the love of dress and pleasure, to which the young are already 
too prone; it tempts to vanity and the love of display; it induces a 
strong- desire to enter on the amusements of the world at an early period, 
in order to exhibit the accomplishments thus acquired, and to enjoy the 
pleasures for which a taste has been formed ; it promotes forwardness 
instead of modesty ; it leads the young ones exactly in the opposite 
direction to that pointed out by the word of God and pledged in the bap- 
tismal vows. Thus educated, they are, in this respect at least, trained 
not in the way they ought to go, but in the way they should forsake, 
according to almost universal consent, if by divine grace they are ever 
turned to God in true penitence and faith. 

2dly. In relation to those more advanced in years, it is liable to all 
the above objections in a still higher degree, beside some others. It is 
acknowledged to be, by the help of exciting music and the mingling to- 
gether of both sexes, and quick action of the limbs, the most exhilirating, 
fascinating, and absorbing of all exercises ; quite different from any of 
those to which it has been compared, and by which it is sought to be 
justified, so that it is almost always indulged to excess; extended to a 
late hour of the night; followed by exhaustion of mind and body, and 
sometimes sickness. Instead of being sober-minded, as young men are 
exhorted to be by the Apostle, those engaged in this exercise are more 
or less beside themselves through high excitement, uttering idle words 
in great abundance, and being high minded and mannered. Great is the 
temptation not only to expensive dressing, but to improper dressing and 
exposure of the person, to the display of vanity, the seeking after admi- 
ration for qualities having no real worth in them. Those who think 
they excel in a more private way are tempted to exhibit themselves in 
some more public one. Those who see it performed with great skill in 
private are tempted to see it performod more admirably in the theatre, 
and this will reconcile them to the more immodest performances in pri- 
vate, which at first were offensive to the feelings. 

Is this a proper entertainment or practice for the Christian 1 ? It has 
always been considered so disreputable to excel in this as a public per- 
former, that such an one has been excluded, sometimes from civil, and 
always from religious privileges, and fiom respectable society. Can the 
practice of it then, even in a more private way, be suitable and becom- 
ing to a serious Christian ? Very few persons can be found who do not 
answer, No. How many there are who say that the ministers of the 
gospel need not, should not, preach against it, but only seek to insinuate 
religion into the heart, for if that be changed, this, and all such things, 
are forsaken as insipid and uncongenial. Young converts feel this to be 
so, and are distressed at the suggestion that they may one day be drawn 
back to the love of these things; but when their love grows cold, when 
they cease to watch and pray against temptation, but go into it, then old 
tastes and desires return, and if they yield, then are they brought into 
still closer intimacy with the lovers of pleasure, and if they do not relin- 
quish their profession, continue it only to be a burden to themselves, a 
matter of grief to some and of railery to others. If such peisons could 
only know what is thought, and often said of them, by many of the voia- 
ries of pleasure who wonder at their inconsistency, it surely would not be 



96 



without its effect upon their conduct in this matter. The men of this 
world aie wise in their generation and good judges of consistency. In 
such matters let their testimony be heard. Only one lemark now, and I 
am done. Let any persons doubting or hesitating on this subject, just 
compare their feelings and views, when first converted to the Lord, if 
truly so, their preparation for renewing the baptismal vows, for kneeling 
the first time at the sacred chancel, and their exercises while there, with 
their preparation for the ball-room and their exercises of mind and body 
while there, and thus test the compatibility of the two; and if any should 
still say, as some have said, that they have been as pious in a ball-room 
or theatre as at the table of the Lord, let them seriously enquire whether 
the piety they have exercised in either place is such as will be accepted 
in the great day, or make them meet for the purer joys of that great 
temple above where the sons of God shall shout for joy, and everv mem- 
ber of their glorified bodies be made to take some part in the heavenly 
worship ? 



ERRATA. 



Page 37, note, 


Baron, 


should be 


Jason, 




42, line 25, 


nine, 


it 


nine hundred, 


<< 


48, line 24, 


of 


tt 


for, 


c< 


51, line 3, 


forbidden, 


tt 


commanded, 


tc 


60, line 13, 


1832, 


tt 


1818, 


it 


72, line 7, 


greatest. 


it 


greater, 


tt 


72, line 23, 


their gratification, 


tt 


these gratifications, 


tt 


76, line 8, 


members, 


a 


numbers, 


a 


81, line 33, 


Persona intronesta, 


tt 


Personce inhonestae 


tt 


87, line 37, 


connection, 


- a 


impression, 


tt 


89, line 13, 


eighteen, 


tt 


only seven, 


tt 


89, line 16, 


Roberdean, 


it 


Roberdeau, 


It 


89, line 30, 


proud, 


it 


fond, 


it 


92, line 7, 


Beam, 


tt 


Deum, 


tt 


92, note, 


part, 


tt 


feast, 


It 


95, line 24, 


high minded, 


it 


light minded, 


It 


96, line 3, 


now, 


it 


more. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: March 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



